1

Criminal Law – A branch of municipal law which defines crimes, treats of their nature
and provides for their punishment.

Legal Basis of Punishment

The power to punish violators of criminal law comes within the police power of the state.
It is the injury inflicted to the public which a criminal action seeks to redress, and not the injury to
the individual.

The objective of the punishment is two-fold: absolute and relative. The absolute theory is to inflict
punishment as a form of retributive justice. It is to destroy wrong in its effort to annihilate right,
to put an end to the criminal activity of the offender.

On the other hand, the relative theory purports to prevent the offender from further
offending public right or to the right to repel an imminent or actual aggression, exemplary or by
way of example to others not to follow the path taken by the offender and ultimately for
reformation or to place him under detention to teach him the obligations of a law-abiding citizen.

Power to Enact Penal Laws

Only the legislative branch of the government can enact penal laws. While the President
may define and punish an act as a crime, such exercise of power is not executive but legislative as
he derives such power from the lawmaking body. It is in essence, an exercise of legislative power
by the Chief Executive.

Limitations on the power of Congress to enact penal laws

1. Must be general in application.

2. Must not partake of the nature of an ex post facto law.

3. Must not partake of the nature of a bill of attainder.

4. Must not impose cruel and unusual punishment or excessive fines.

Characteristics of Criminal Law: (G.T.P.)

1. General – the law is binding to all persons who reside in the Philippines

Generality of criminal law means that the criminal law of the country governs all persons within the
country regardless of their race, belief, sex, or creed. However, it is subject to certain exceptions
brought about by international agreement. Ambassadors, chiefs of states and other diplomatic
officials are immune from the application of penal laws when they are in the country where they are
assigned.

Note that consuls are not diplomatic officers. This includes consul-general, vice-consul or any
consul in a foreign country, who are therefore, not immune to the operation or application of the
penal law of the country where they are assigned. Consuls are subject to the penal laws of the
country where they are assigned.

Exceptions to general application of criminal law:

a) principles of public international law
b) treaties or treaty stipulations

c) laws of preferential application

2. Territorial – the law is binding to all crimes committed within the National Territory of
the Philippines
Exception to Territorial Application: Instances enumerated under Article 2.

Territoriality means that the penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its territory.
It cannot penalize crimes committed outside the same. This is subject to certain exceptions brought

1
 2

about by international agreements and practice. The territory of the country is not limited to the
land where its sovereignty resides but includes also its maritime and interior waters as well as its
atmosphere.

Terrestrial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised over land.

Fluvial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised over maritime and interior waters.

Aerial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised over the atmosphere.

The Archipelagic Rule

All bodies of water comprising the maritime zone and interior waters abounding different islands
comprising the Philippine Archipelago are part of the Philippine territory regardless of their breadth,
depth, width or dimension..

3. Prospective (Prospectivity)– the law does not have any retroactive effect.
Exception to Prospective Application: when new statute is favorable to the accused.

Theories of Criminal Law

1. Classical Theory – Man is essentially a moral creature with an absolute free will to
choose between good and evil and therefore more stress is placed upon the result of
the felonious act than upon the criminal himself.

The purpose of penalty is retribution. The offender is made to suffer for the wrong he has done.
There is scant regard for the human element of the crime. The law does not look into why the
offender committed the crime. Capital punishment is a product of this kind of this school of thought.
Man is regarded as a moral creature who understands right from wrong. So that when he commits
a wrong, he must be prepared to accept the punishment therefore.

2. Positivist Theory – Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid

phenomenon which conditions him to do wrong in spite of or contrary to his volition.
(Crime is essentially a social and natural phenomenon)

The purpose of penalty is reformation. There is great respect for the human element because the
offender is regarded as socially sick who needs treatment, not punishment. Crimes are regarded
as social phenomena which constrain a person to do wrong although not of his own
volition

Eclectic or Mixed Philosophy

This combines both positivist and classical thinking. Crimes that are economic and social and
nature should be dealt with in a positivist manner; thus, the law is more compassionate. Heinous
crimes should be dealt with in a classical manner; thus, capital punishment.

Sources of Criminal Law

1. The Revised Penal Code
2. Special Penal Laws – Acts enacted of the Philippine Legislature punishing offenses or
omissions.

Construction of Penal Laws

1. Criminal Statutes are liberally construed in favor of the offender. This means that no
person shall be brought within their terms who is not clearly within them, nor should
any act be pronounced criminal which is not clearly made so by statute.
2. The original text in which a penal law is approved in case of a conflict with an official
translation.
3. Interpretation by analogy has no place in criminal law

2
 3

BASIC MAXIMS IN CRIMINAL LAW

Doctrine of Pro Reo

Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied and the law admits of two interpretations – one
lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender – that interpretation which is lenient or favorable
to the offender will be adopted.

Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege

There is no crime when there is no law punishing the same. This is true to civil law countries, but
not to common law countries.

Because of this maxim, there is no common law crime in the Philippines. No matter how wrongful,
evil or bad the act is, if there is no law defining the act, the same is not considered a crime.

Common law crimes are wrongful acts which the community/society condemns as contemptible,
even though there is no law declaring the act criminal.

Not any law punishing an act or omission may be valid as a criminal law. If the law punishing an
act is ambiguous, it is null and void.

Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea

The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal. This is true to a felony characterized by
dolo, but not a 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.

Utilitarian Theory or Protective Theory

The primary purpose of the punishment under criminal law is the protection of society from actual
and potential wrongdoers. The courts, therefore, in exacting retribution for the wronged society,
should direct the punishment to potential or actual wrongdoers, since criminal law is directed
against acts and omissions which the society does not approve. Consistent with this theory, the
mala prohibita principle which punishes an offense regardless of malice or criminal intent, should
not be utilized to apply the full harshness of the special law.

MALA IN SE AND MALA PROHIBITA

Violations of the Revised Penal Code are referred to as malum in se, which literally means, that the
act is inherently evil or bad or per se wrongful. On the other hand, violations of special laws are
generally referred to as malum prohibitum.

Note, however, that not all violations of special laws are mala prohibita. Even if the crime is punished
under a special law, if the act punished is one which is inherently wrong, the same is malum in se,
and, therefore, good faith and the lack of criminal intent is a valid defense; unless it is the product
of criminal negligence or culpa.

Likewise when the special laws requires that the punished act be committed knowingly and willfully,
criminal intent is required to be proved before criminal liability may arise.

When the act penalized is not inherently wrong, it is wrong only because a law punishes the same.

For example, Presidential Decree No. 532 punishes piracy in Philippine waters and the special law
punishing brigandage in the highways. These acts are inherently wrong and although they are
punished under special law, the acts themselves are mala in se; thus, good faith or lack of criminal
intent is a defense.

Mala in se vs. Mala prohibita

Crimes mala in se Crimes mala prohibita

3
 4

Those so serious in their effects on society as to Those violations of mere rules of convenience
call for almost unanimous condemnation of its designed to secure a more orderly regulation of
members; the affairs of society

Criminal intent necessary Criminal intent is not necessary

Refers generally to felonies defined and Refers generally to acts made
penalized by the Revised Penal criminal by special laws
Code

Distinction between crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code and crimes punished
under special laws

1. As to moral trait of the offender

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the moral trait of the offender is
considered. This is why liability would only arise when there is dolo or culpa in the
commission of the punishable act.

In crimes punished under special laws, the moral trait of the offender is not considered; it
is enough that the prohibited act was voluntarily done.

2. As to use of good faith as defense

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, good faith or lack of criminal intent is a
valid defense; unless the crime is the result of culpa

In crimes punished under special laws, good faith is not a defense

3. As to degree of accomplishment of the crime

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the degree of accomplishment of the
crime is taken into account in punishing the offender; thus, there are attempted, frustrated,
and consummated stages in the commission of the crime.

In crimes punished under special laws, the act gives rise to a crime only when it is
consummated; there are no attempted or frustrated stages, unless the special law
expressly penalize the mere attempt or frustration of the crime.

4. As to mitigating and aggravating circumstances

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, mitigating and aggravating
circumstances are taken into account in imposing the penalty since the moral trait of the
offender is considered.

In crimes punished under special laws, mitigating and aggravating circumstances are not
taken into account in imposing the penalty.

5. As to degree of participation

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, when there is more than one offender,
the degree of participation of each in the commission of the crime is taken into account in
imposing the penalty; thus, offenders are classified as principal, accomplice and
accessory.

In crimes punished under special laws, the degree of participation of the offenders is not
considered. All who perpetrated the prohibited act are penalized to the same extent. There
is no principal or accomplice or accessory to consider.

Art. 1. This Code shall take effect on January 1, 1932.

Art. 2. Application of its provisions. -- Except as provided in the treaties and

laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced

4
 5

not only within the Philippine Archipelago including its atmosphere, its
interior waters and Maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against
those who:

1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;

2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine

Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippine Islands;

3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding
number;

4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in

the exercise of their functions; or (Some of these crimes are bribery, fraud
against national treasury, malversation of public funds or property, and illegal use of
public funds; e.g., A judge who accepts a bribe while in Japan.)

5. Should commit any crimes against the national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. (These crimes include
treason, espionage, piracy, mutiny, inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals,
correspondence with hostile country, flight to enemy’s country and violation of
neutrality)

• Rules as to crimes committed aboard foreign merchant vessels:

1. French Rule – Such crimes are not triable in the courts of that country, unless their
commission affects the peace and security of the territory or the safety of the state
is endangered.

2. English Rule – Such crimes are triable in that country, unless they merely affect
things within the vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof. (This is
applicable in the Philippines)

• Requirements of “an offense committed while on a Philippine Ship or Airship”

1. Registered with the Philippine Bureau of Customs

2. Ship must be in the high seas or the airship must be in international airspace.

Under international law rule, a vessel which is not registered in accordance with the laws of any
country is considered a pirate vessel and piracy is a crime against humanity in general, such that
wherever the pirates may go, they can be prosecuted.

• US v. Bull
A crime which occurred on board of a foreign vessel, which began when the ship was
in a foreign territory and continued when it entered into Philippine waters, is considered a
continuing crime. Hence within the jurisdiction of the local courts.

Two situations where the foreign country may not apply its criminal law even if a crime was
committed on board a vessel within its territorial waters and these are:

(1) When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a foreign country, because war vessels are
part of the sovereignty of the country to whose naval force they belong;

(2) When the foreign country in whose territorial waters the crime was committed adopts the
French Rule, which applies only to merchant vessels, except when the crime committed
affects the national security or public order of such foreign country.

When public officers or employees commit an offense in the exercise of their functions

5
 6

As a general rule, the Revised Penal Code governs only when the crime committed pertains to the
exercise of the public official’s functions, those having to do with the discharge of their duties in a
foreign country. The functions contemplated are those, which are, under the law, to be performed
by the public officer in the Foreign Service of the Philippine government in a foreign country.

Exception: The Revised Penal Code governs if the crime was committed within the Philippine
Embassy or within the embassy grounds in a foreign country. This is because embassy grounds
are considered an extension of sovereignty.

Art 3. Definitions. -- Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies

(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 results from imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight, or lack of skill.

• Acts – an overt or external act

• Omission – failure to perform a duty required by law.

• Felonies - acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code

• Offense- crimes punished under special law
• Misdemeanor- minor infraction of law, such as violation of ordinance
• Crime - acts and omissions punishable by any law

• HOW FELONIES ARE COMMITTED:

1. by means of deceit (dolo) - There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent. Requisites: a. freedom
b. intelligence
c. intent
Examples: murder, treason, and robbery.

2. by means of fault (culpa) - There is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

a. imprudence - deficiency of action; e.g. A was driving a truck along a road.

He hit B because it was raining - reckless imprudence.

b. Negligence - deficiency of perception; failure to foresee impending danger,

usually involves lack of foresight
c. Requisites:
1. Freedom
2. Intelligence
3. Imprudence, negligence, lack of skill or foresight
4. Lack of intent

Intentional felonies vs. Culpable Felonies

Intentional Felonies Culpable Felonies
Act or omission is malicious Act or omission is not malicious
Offender has the intention to cause an injury to Offender has no intention to cause injury
another
Act performed or omission incurred with Act or omission results from imprudence,
deliberate intent negligence, lack or
foresight or lack of skill

6
 7

Voluntariness comprehends the concurrence of freedom of action, intelligence and the fact that
the act was intentional. In culpable felonies, there is no voluntariness if either freedom, intelligence
or imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill is lacking. Without voluntariness, there
can be no dolo or culpa, hence, there is no felony

• Mistake of fact - is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused
injury to another. He is not criminally liable.

a. Requisites:
1. that the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused
believed them to be;
2. intention of the accused is lawful;
3. mistake must be without fault of carelessness.

Mistake of fact would be relevant only when the felony would have been intentional or through dolo,
but not when the felony is a result of culpa. When the felony is a product of culpa, do not discuss
mistake of fact

Mens rea

The technical term mens rea is sometimes referred to in common parlance as the gravamen of the
offense. To a layman, that is what you call the “bullseye” of the crime. This term is used
synonymously with criminal or deliberate intent, but that is not exactly correct. Mens rea of the crime
depends upon the elements of the crime.

Art. 4. Criminal liability.-- Criminal liability shall be incurred:

1. By any person committing a felony, although the wrongful act done

be different from that which he intended.

In the first paragraph, two elements must be present:

1. A felony committed; and

2. The felony committed resulted in the commission of another felony.

Article 4, paragraph 1 presupposes that the act done is the proximate cause of the resulting felony.
It must be the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the felonious act.

• Doctrine of Proximate Cause – such adequate and efficient cause as, in the
natural order of events, and under the particular circumstances surrounding the case,
which would necessarily produce the event.

Requisites:
a. the direct, natural, and logical cause

b. produces the injury or damage

c. unbroken by any sufficient intervening cause

d. without which the result would not have occurred

• Proximate Cause is negated by:

a. Active force, distinct act, or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the
accused, which serves as a sufficient intervening cause.

b. Resulting injury or damage is due to the intentional act of the victim.

• Requisite for Presumption that the blow was cause of the death – Where there has
been an injury inflicted sufficient to produce death followed by the demise of the
person, the presumption arises that the injury was the cause of the death. Provided:

7
 8

a. victim was in normal health

b. death ensued within a reasonable time

• Causes which produce a different result:

a. Mistake in identity of the victim – injuring one person who is mistaken for
another e.g., A intended to shoot B, but he instead shot C because he (A) mistook
C for B.

b. Mistake in blow – hitting somebody other than the target due to lack of skill or
fortuitous instances (this is a complex crime under Art. 48) e.g., B and C were
walking together. A wanted to shoot B, but he instead injured C. .

c. Injurious result is greater than that intended – causing injury graver than
intended or expected (this is a mitigating circumstance due to lack of intent to
commit so grave a wrong under Art. 13) e.g., A wanted to injure B. However, B
died.

In praeter intentionem, it is mitigating only if there is a notable or notorious disparity between

the means employed and the resulting felony.

2. 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.

• Requisites:
a. Act would have been an offense against persons or property

b. Act is not an actual violation of another provision of the Code or of a special penal
law

c. There was criminal intent

d. Accomplishment was inherently impossible; or inadequate or ineffectual means

were employed.

• Notes:
a. Offender must believe that he can consummate the intended crime, a man
stabbing another who he knew was already dead cannot be liable for an impossible
crime.

b. The law intends to punish the criminal intent.

c. There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.

• Felonies against persons: parricide, murder, homicide, infanticide, physical injuries, etc.
• Felonies against property: robbery, theft, usurpation, swindling, etc.

• Inherent impossibility: A thought that B was just sleeping. B was already dead. A
shot B. A is liable. If A knew that B is dead and he still shot him, then A is not liable.

inherent impossibility, this means that under any and all circumstances, the crime could
not have materialized. If the crime could have materialized under a different set of facts, employing
the same mean or the same act, it is not an impossible crime; it would be an attempted felony.

Legal impossibility occurs where the intended act, even if completed, would not amount
into a crime.

8
 9

Factual impossibility occurs when an extraneous circumstances is unknown to the actor

or beyond his control to prevent the consummation of the intended crime.

Under Art. 4, par. 2, the law does not make any distinction between factual or physical
impossibility and legal impossibility. (pp vs. intod)

• Employment of inadequate means: A used poison to kill B. However, B survived

because A used small quantities of poison - frustrated murder.

• Ineffectual means: A aimed his gun at B. When he fired the gun, no bullet came out
because the gun was empty. A is liable.

By its very nature, an impossible crime is a formal crime. It is either consummated or not
committed at all. There is therefore no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.

Unconsummated felonies (Attempted and frustrated felonies) vs. Impossible crimes

Attempted of Frustrated Felony Impossible Crime
Intent is not accomplished Intent is not accomplished
Intent of the offender possible of Intent of the offender, cannot be accomplished
accomplishment
Accomplishment is prevented by the Intent cannot be accomplished because it is
intervention of certain cause or accident in inherently impossible of accomplishment or
which the offender had no part because the means employed by the offender
is inadequate or ineffectual

Art 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but
which are not covered by the law, and in cases of excessive penalties. –
Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to
repress and which is not punishable by law, it shall render the proper
decision and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the Department of
Justice, the reasons which induce the court to believe that said act should
be made subject of legislation.

In the same way the court shall submit to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, such statement as may be deemed proper, without
suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict enforcement of the
provisions of this Code would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive
penalty, taking into consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused
by the offense.
Article 5 covers two situations:
(1) The court cannot convict the accused because the acts do not constitute a crime. The
proper judgment is acquittal, but the court is mandated to report to the Chief Executive that
said act be made subject of penal legislation and why.

(2) Where the court finds the penalty prescribed for the crime too harsh considering the
conditions surrounding the commission of he crime, the judge should impose the law (Dura
lex sed lex). The most that he could do is to recommend to the Chief Executive to grant
executive clemency.

• Paragraph 2 does not apply to crimes punishable by special law, including

profiteering, and illegal possession of firearms or drugs. There can be no executive
clemency for these crimes.

Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. - Consummated

felonies, as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.

9
 10

A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its

execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the
offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony
as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a

felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.

• Development of a crime
1. Internal acts – intent and plans; usually not punishable

2. External acts
a. Preparatory Acts – acts tending toward the crime
b. Acts of Execution – acts directly connected the crime

Mere intention is therefore, not punishable. For as long as there is no physical form of the internal
acts, the same is outside the inquiry of criminal law.
Stages of Commission of a Crime

Attempt Frustrated Consummated

• Overt acts of execution • All acts of execution are • All the acts of execution
• are started • present • are present
Not all acts of execution are Crime sought to be The result sought is
• present • committed is not achieved achieved
Due to reasons other than Due to intervening causes
the spontaneous independent of the will of
desistance of the the perpetrator
perpetrator

Desistance

Desistance on the part of the offender negates criminal liability in the attempted stage. Desistance
is true only in the attempted stage of the felony. If under the definition of the felony, the act done
is already in the frustrated stage, no amount of desistance will negate criminal liability.

• Stages of a Crime does not apply in:

1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless the otherwise is provided for.

2. Formal crimes (e.g., slander, adultery, etc.)

3. Impossible Crimes

4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt. Examples: attempt to flee to an enemy

country, treason, corruption of minors.

5. Felonies by omission

6. Crimes committed by mere agreement. Examples: betting in sports (endings in

basketball), corruption of public officers.

In criminal law, you are not allowed to speculate, not to imagine what crime is intended, but apply
the provisions of the law on the facts given.

Test to determine whether attempted or frustrated stage:

10
 11

The first test is what we call the subjective phase. The second test is what is referred to as the
objective phase. When the subjective and objective phases in the commission of the crime are
both present, there is a consummated felony.

As suggested, the subjective phase is the portion of the execution of the felony starting from the
point where he has control over his acts. If it reaches the point where he has no more control over
his acts, the subjective phase in the commission of the crime is completed.

On the other hand, the objective phase covers that the period of time where the subjective phase
has ended and where the offender has no more control over the effects of his criminal acts.

If the subjective phase is completed or has already passed, but the felony was not produced
nonetheless, the crime committed as a rule would be frustrated.

• Applications:
a. A put poison in B’s food. B threw away his food. A is liable - attempted murder.1

b. A stole B’s car, but he returned it. A is liable - (consummated) theft.

c. A aimed his gun at B. C held A’s hand and prevented him from shooting B -
attempted murder.

d. A inflicted a mortal wound on B. B managed to survive - frustrated murder.

e. A intended to kill B by shooting him. A missed - attempted murder.

f. A doused B’s house with kerosene. But before he could light the match, he was
caught - attempted arson.

g. A cause a blaze, but did not burn the house of B - frustrated arson.

h. B’s house was set on fire by A - (consummated) arson.

i. A tried to rape B. B managed to escape. There was no penetration - attempted

rape.

j. A got hold of B’s painting. A was caught before he could leave B’s house -
frustrated robbery.2

Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. -- Light felonies are punishable only
when they have been consummated with the exception of those committed
against persons or property.

A light felony is a violation of a penal law which is punished by a penalty of imprisonment of not
more than thirty days or arresto menor or a fine of not more than P200.00 or both, upon the
discretion of the court.

Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. -- Conspiracy and proposal

to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially
provides a penalty therefore.

1
The difference between murder and homicide will be discussed in Criminal Law II. These crimes are
found in Articles 248 and 249, Book II of the Revised Penal Code.

2
The difference between theft and robbery will be discussed in Criminal Law II. These crimes are found in
Title Ten, Chapters One and Three, Book II of the Revised Penal Code.

11
 12

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.

• Conspiracy is punishable in the following cases: treason, rebellion or insurrection,

sedition, coup d’ etat, arson(PD 1613) and monopolies and combinations in restraint
of trade.

• Conspiracy to commit a crime is not to be confused with conspiracy as a means of

committing a crime. In both cases there is an agreement but mere conspiracy to
commit a crime is not punished EXCEPT in treason, rebellion, or sedition. Even then,
if the treason is actually committed, the conspiracy will be considered as a means of
committing it and the accused will all be charged for treason and not for conspiracy to
commit treason.

Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit a Crime

Conspiracy Proposal

Elements • Agreement among 2 or more • A person has decided to commit a crime •

persons to commit a crime He proposes its commission to another
• They decide to commit it
Crimes 1. Conspiracy to commit sedition 1. Proposal to commit treason
2. Conspiracy to commit rebellion 2. Proposal to commit rebellion or insurrection
3. Conspiracy to commit treason

Two kinds of conspiracy:

(1) Conspiracy as a crime; and

(2) Conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability

When conspiracy itself is a crime, no overt act is necessary to bring about the criminal liability. The
mere conspiracy is the crime itself. This is only true when the law expressly punishes the mere
conspiracy; otherwise, the conspiracy does not bring about the commission of the crime because
conspiracy is not an overt act but a mere preparatory act. Treason, rebellion, sedition, and coup
d’etat are the only crimes where the conspiracy and proposal to commit to them are punishable.

When the conspiracy is only a basis of incurring criminal liability, there must be an overt act done
before the co-conspirators become criminally liable.

Composite crimes

Composite crimes are crimes which, in substance, consist of more than one crime but in the eyes
of the law, there is only one crime. For example, the crimes of robbery with homicide, robbery with
rape, robbery with physical injuries.

Art. 9. Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital
punishment or penalties which in any of their 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
he penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both is
provided.

12
 13

• Capital punishment - death penalty.

• Penalties (imprisonment):

Grave - six years and one day to reclusion perpetua (life);

Less grave - one month and one day to six years;

Light - arresto menor (one day to 30 days).

Felonies are classified as follows:

(1) According to the manner of their commission

Under Article 3, they are classified as, intentional felonies or those committed with
deliberate intent; and culpable felonies or those resulting from negligence, reckless
imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of skill.

(2) According to the stages of their execution

Under Article 6., felonies are classified as attempted felony when the offender commences
the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than
his own spontaneous desistance; frustrated felony when the offender commences the
commission of a felony as a consequence but which would produce the felony as a
consequence but which nevertheless do not produce the felony by reason of causes
independent of the perpetrator; and, consummated felony when all the elements
necessary for its execution are present.

(3) According to their gravity

Under Article 9, felonies are classified as grave felonies or those to which attaches the
capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive; less grave
felonies or those to which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period
was correccional; and light felonies or those infractions of law for the commission of which
the penalty is arresto menor.

Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this code. --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.

• Provisions of RPC applicable to special laws:

a. Art. 16 Participation of Accomplices
b. Art. 22 Retroactivity of Penal laws if favorable to the accused
c. Art. 45 Confiscation of instruments used in the crime

You will only apply the provisions of the Revised Penal Code as a supplement to the special law,
or simply correlate the violated special law, if needed to avoid an injustice. If no justice would
result, do not give suppletorily application of the Revised Penal Code to that of special law.

Circumstances affecting criminal liability

There are five circumstances affecting criminal liability:

(1) Justifying circumstances;

(2) Exempting circumstances;

(3) Mitigating circumstances;

(4) Aggravating circumstances; and

(5) Alternative circumstances.

13
 14

There are two others which are found elsewhere in the provisions of the Revised Penal Code:

(1) Absolutory cause; and

(2) Extenuating circumstances.

In justifying and exempting circumstances, there is no criminal liability. When an accused invokes
them, he in effect admits the commission of a crime but tries to avoid the liability thereof. The
burden is upon him to establish beyond reasonable doubt the required conditions to justify or
exempt his acts from criminal liability. What is shifted is only the burden of evidence, not the burden
of proof.

Justifying circumstances contemplate intentional acts and, hence, are incompatible with dolo.
Exempting circumstances may be invoked in culpable felonies.

Absolutory cause
The effect of this is to absolve the offender from criminal liability, although not from civil liability.

1 ) Article 20 provides that 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 exception of
accessories who profited themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

2) Article 89 provides how criminal liability is extinguished:

Death of the convict as to the personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is
extinguished if death occurs before final judgment;

Service of the sentence;

Amnesty;

Absolute pardon;

Prescription of the crime;

Prescription of the penalty; and

Marriage of the offended woman as provided in Article 344.

3) Under Article 247, a legally married person who kills or inflicts physical injuries upon his or her
spouse whom he surprised having sexual intercourse with his or her paramour or mistress in
not criminally liable.

4) Under Article 219, discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence of the ward by their
guardian is not penalized.

5) Under Article 332, in the case of theft, swindling and malicious mischief, there is no criminal
liability but only civil liability, when the offender and the offended party are related as spouse,
ascendant, descendant, brother and sister-in-law living together or where in case the widowed
spouse and the property involved is that of the deceased spouse, before such property had
passed on to the possession of third parties.

6) Under Article 344, in cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, and rape, the
marriage of the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action.

7) Any person who entered another’s dwelling to prevent serious harm to himself, the occupants
of the dwelling or a third person rendered some service to humanity or justice, or entered
cafes, taverns, inns and other public houses while the same were open. (Art. 280, par. 3)

Absolutory cause has the effect of an exempting circumstance and they are predicated on lack of
voluntariness like instigation. Instigation is associated with criminal intent. Do not consider culpa
in connection with instigation. If the crime is culpable, do not talk of instigation. In instigation, the
crime is committed with dolo. It is confused with entrapment.

14
 15

Entrapment is not an absolutory cause. Entrapment does not exempt the offender or mitigate his
criminal liability. But instigation absolves the offender from criminal liability because in instigation,
the offender simply acts as a tool of the law enforcers and, therefore, he is acting without criminal
intent because without the instigation, he would not have done the criminal act which he did upon
instigation of the law enforcers.

Difference between instigation and entrapment

In instigation, the criminal plan or design exists in the mind of the law enforcer with whom the person
instigated cooperated so it is said that the person instigated is acting only as a mere instrument or
tool of the law enforcer in the performance of his duties.

On the other hand, in entrapment, a criminal design is already in the mind of the person entrapped.
It did not emanate from the mind of the law enforcer entrapping him. Entrapment involves only ways
and means which are laid down or resorted to facilitate the apprehension of the culprit.

Mistake of fact is an absolutory cause. The offender is acting without criminal intent. So in mistake
of fact, it is necessary that had the facts been true as the accused believed them to be, this act is
justified. If not, there is criminal liability, because there is no mistake of fact anymore. The offender
must believe he is performing a lawful act.

Extenuating circumstances

The effect of this is to mitigate the criminal liability of the offender. In other words, this has the
same effect as mitigating circumstances, only you do not call it mitigating because this is not found
in Article 13.

The concealment of honor by mother in the crime of infanticide is an extenuating circumstance but
not in the case of parricide when the age of the victim is three days old and above.

In the crime of adultery on the part of a married woman abandoned by her husband. Abandonment
by the husband does not justify the act of the woman. It only extenuates or reduces criminal liability.
When the effect of the circumstance is to lower the penalty there is an extenuating circumstance.

Distinctions between justifying circumstances and exempting circumstances

In justifying circumstances –

(1) The circumstance affects the act, not the actor;

(2) The act complained of is considered to have been done within the bounds of law; hence, it
is legitimate and lawful in the eyes of the law;

(3) Since the act is considered lawful, there is no crime, and because there is no crime, there
is no criminal;

(4) Since there is no crime or criminal, there is no criminal liability as well as civil liability.

In exempting circumstances –

(1) The circumstances affect the actor, not the act;

(2) The act complained of is actually wrongful, but the actor acted without voluntariness. He
is a mere tool or instrument of the crime;

(3) Since the act complained of is actually wrongful, there is a crime. But because the actor
acted without voluntariness, there is absence of dolo or culpa. There is no criminal;

(4) Since there is a crime committed but there is no criminal, there is civil liability for the wrong
done. But there is no criminal liability. However, in paragraphs 4 and 7 of Article 12, there
is neither criminal nor civil liability.

Art. 11: Justifying Circumstances - those wherein the acts of the actor are in
accordance with law, hence, he is justified. There is no criminal and civil
liability because there is no crime.

15
 16

• SELF-DEFENSE

A. Reason for lawfulness of self-defense: because it would be impossible for the State
to protect all its citizens. Also a person cannot just give up his rights without any
resistance being offered.

Since the justifying circumstances are in the nature of defensive acts, there must be always
unlawful aggression. The reasonableness of the means employed depends on the gravity of the
aggression. If the unlawful aggressor was killed, this can only be justified if it was done to save the
life of the person defending or the person being defended. The equation is “life was taken to
save life.”

B. Rights included in self-defense:

1. Defense of person

2. Defense of rights protected by law

3. Defense of property:
a. The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has a right to exclude any person
from the enjoyment or disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such
force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or
threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property. (Art.
429, New Civil Code)

4. Defense of chastity

C. ELEMENTS:

1. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION - is a physical act manifesting danger to life or

limb; it is either actual or imminent.

2. REASONABLE NECESSITY OF THE MEANS EMPLOYED TO

PREVENT OR REPEL IT;

3. LACK OF SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION ON THE PART OF THE

PERSON DEFENDING HIMSELF.

D. Kinds of Self-Defense

1. Self-defense of chastity - to be entitled to complete self-defense of chastity,

there must be an attempt to rape, mere imminence thereof will suffice.

Honor of a woman in respect of her defense is equated with her virginity

2. Defense of property - an attack on the property must be coupled with an

attack on the person of the owner, or of one entrusted with the care of such
property.

3. Self-defense in libel - physical assault may be justified when the libel is aimed
at a person’s good name, and while the libel is in progress, one libel deserves
another.

*Burden of proof - on the accused (sufficient, clear and convincing evidence; must
rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the weakness of the prosecution)

• DEFENSE OF RELATIVE

Elements:
1. unlawful aggression

2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the attack;

16
 17

3. in case provocation was given by the person attacked, that the person making the
defense had no part in such provocation.

Relatives entitled to the defense:

1. spouse
2. ascendants
3. descendants
4. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters
5. relatives by affinity in the same degree (2 nd degree) 6. relatives by
consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.

The third element need not take place. The relative defended may even be the
original aggressor. All that is required to justify the act of the relative defending
is that he takes no part in such provocation.

General opinion is to the effect that all relatives mentioned must be legitimate,
except in cases of brothers and sisters who, by relatives by nature, may be
illegitimate.

The unlawful aggression may depend on the honest belief of the person
making the defense.

• DEFENSE OF STRANGER
Elements
1. unlawful aggression

2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the attack; 3.

the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil

motive.

*** A relative not included in defense of relative is included in defense of stranger.

*** Be not induced by evil motive means that even an enemy of the aggressor who
comes to the defense of a stranger may invoke this justifying circumstances so long
as he is not induced by a motive that is evil.

• STATE OF NECESSITY
A. Art. 11, Par. 4 provides:

Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which
causes damage to another, provided that the following requisites are
present:
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;

Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;

Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of

preventing it.

FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF A RIGHT OR OFFICE

A. Elements:
1. that the accused acted in the performance of a duty, or in the lawful exercise of a
right or office;

17
 18

2. that the injury caused or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due
performance of the duty, or the lawful exercise of such right or office.

B. A police officer is justified in shooting and killing a criminal who refuses to stop
when ordered to do so, and after such officer fired warning shots in the air.
shooting an offender who refused to surrender is justified, but not a thief who
refused to be arrested.

C. A mere security guard has no authority or duty to fire at a thief, resulting in the
latter’s death.

• OBEDIENCE TO A SUPERIOR ORDER

A. Elements:
1. there is an order;

2. the order is for a legal purpose;

3. the means used to carry out said order is lawful.

EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

• Exempting circumstances (non-imputability) are those ground for exemption from

punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime of any of the conditions
which make the act voluntary, or negligent.

• Basis: The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence of

intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the absence of negligence on the part
of the accused.

• A person who acts WITHOUT MALICE (without intelligence, freedom of action or intent)
or WITHOUT NEGLIGENCE (without intelligence, freedom of action or fault) is NOT
CRIMINALLY LIABLE or is EXEMPT FROM PUNISHMENT.

• There is a crime committed but no criminal liability arises from it because of the
complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness
of the act.

• Burden of proof: Any of the circumstances is a matter of defense and must be proved
by the defendant to the satisfaction of the court.

Art. 12. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY.

The following are exempt from criminal liability:

1. AN IMBECILE OR INSANE PERSON, unless the latter has acted during a

lucid interval.

• Requisites:
a. Offender is an imbecile
b. Offender was insane at the time of the commission of the crime

• IMBECILITY OR INSANITY
a. Basis: complete absence of intelligence, and element of voluntariness.

b. Definition :
An imbecile is one who while advanced in age has a mental development comparable
to that of children between 2 and 7 years of age.

18
 19

An insane is one who acts with complete deprivation of intelligence/reason or without

the least discernment or with total deprivation of freedom of the will.

The two tests for exemption on grounds of insanity:

(1) The test of cognition, or whether the accused acted with complete deprivation of
intelligence in committing said crime; and

(2) The test of volition, or whether the accused acted in total deprivation of freedom of will.

• An imbecile is exempt in all cases from criminal liability (no lucid interval). The
insane is not so exempt if it can be shown that he acted during a lucid interval.

• Presumption is always in favor of sanity.

• Insanity at the time of the commission of the crime and not that at the time of the trial
will exempt one from criminal liability.

• Evidence of insanity must refer to the time preceding the act under prosecution or to
the very moment of its execution.

• Instances of Insanity:

a. Dementia praecox (Schizoprenia) is covered by the term insanity because homicidal

attack is common in such form of psychosis. It is characterized by delusions that
he is being interfered with sexually, or that his property is being taken, thus the
person has no control over his acts.

b. Kleptomania or presence of abnormal, persistent impulse or tendency to steal, to

be considered exempting, will still have to be investigated by competent
psychiatrist to determine if the unlawful act is due to the irresistible impulse
produced by his mental defect, thus loss of will-power. If such mental defect only
diminishes the exercise of his willpower and did not deprive him of the
consciousness of his acts, it is only mitigating.
c. Epilepsy which is a chronic nervous disease characterized by convulsive motions
of the muscles and loss of consciousness may be covered by the term insanity.
However, it must be shown that commission of the offense is during one of those
epileptic attacks.

• Reyes: Feeblemindedness is not imbecility because the offender can distinguish right
from wrong. An imbecile and an insane to be exempted must not be able to distinguish
right from wrong.

• Relova: Feeblemindedness is imbecility.

• Crimes committed while in a dream, by a somnambulist are embraced in the plea of

insanity. Hypnotism, however, is a debatable issue.

• Crime committed while suffering from malignant malaria is characterized by insanity at

times thus such person is not criminally liable.

4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.

• ACCIDENT (DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA): Basis: lack of negligence and intent.

• Elements:
a. A person is performing a lawful act

19
 20

b. Exercise of due dare

c. He causes injury to another by mere accident

d. Without fault or intention of causing it.

Under Article 12, paragraph 4, the offender is exempt not only from criminal but also from civil
liability. This paragraph embodies the Latin maxim “damnum absque injuria”.

• Drawing a weapon/gun in the course of self-defense even if such fired and seriously
injured the assailant is a lawful act and can be considered as done with due care since
it could not have been done in any other manner.

The infliction of the injury by mere accident does not give rise to a criminal or civil liability, but the
person who caused the injury is duty bound to attend to the person who was injured. If he would
abandon him, it is in that abandonment that the crime arises which is punished under the second
paragraph of Article 275.

5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force.

• IRRESISTIBLE FORCE: Basis: complete absence of freedom, an element of

voluntariness

• Elements:
a. That the compulsion is by means of physical force

b. That the physical force must be irresistible.

c. That the physical force must come from a third person

• Force, to be irresistible, must produce such an effect on an individual that despite of

his resistance, it reduces him to a mere instrument and, as such, incapable of
committing a crime. It compels his member to act and his mind to obey. It must act
upon him from the outside and by a third person. He must act not only without a will but
also against his will.

6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an

equal or greater injury.

• UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR: Basis: complete absence of freedom

• Elements
a. that the threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater than, or at least equal to that
w/c he is required to commit

b. that it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would have
succumbed to it.

• Duress, to be a valid defense, should be based on real, imminent or reasonable fear

for one’s life or limb. It should not be inspired by speculative, fanciful or remote fear.

7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented
by some lawful or insuperable cause.

• LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE: Basis: acts without intent, the third condition
of voluntariness in intentional felony

• Elements:

20
 21

a. That an act is required by law to be done

b. That a person fails to perform such act

c. That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause

• Examples of lawful cause:

a. Priest can’t be compelled to reveal what was confessed to him

b. No available transportation – officer not liable for arbitrary detention

c. Mother who was overcome by severe dizziness and extreme debility, leaving child
to die – not liable for infanticide

• To be an EXEMPTING circumstance – INTENT IS WANTING

• INTENT – presupposes the exercise of freedom and the use of intelligence

• Distinction between justifying and exempting circumstance:

a. Exempting – there is a crime but there is no criminal. Act is not justified but the
actor is not criminally liable.

General Rule: There is civil liability

Exception: Par 4 (causing an injury by mere accident) and Par 7 (lawful cause)

b. Justifying – person does not transgress the law, does not commit any crime
because there is nothing unlawful in the act as well as the intention of the actor.

Distinction between Exempting and Justifying Circumstances

Exempting Circumstance Justifying Circumstance

Existence of There is a crime but there is no There is no crime, the act is justified
a crime criminal, the actor is exempted
from liability of his act
• Absolutory Causes – are those where the act committed is a crime but for some
reason of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.

• Exempting and Justifying Circumstances are absolutory causes.

• Other examples of absolutory causes:

1) Art 6 – spontaneous desistance
2) Art 20 – accessories exempt from criminal liability
3) Art 19 par 1 – profiting one’s self or assisting offenders to profit by the effects of
the crime

• Instigation v. Entrapment

INSTIGATION ENTRAPMENT
Instigator practically induces the would-be The ways and means are resorted to for the
accused into the commission of the purpose of trapping and capturing the
offense and himself becomes co-principal lawbreaker in the execution of his criminal
plan.
Accused will be acquitted NOT a bar to accused’s prosecution and
conviction
Absolutory cause NOT an absolutory cause

21
 22

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

• Definition – Those circumstance which reduce the penalty of a crime

• Effect – Reduces the penalty of the crime but does not erase criminal liability nor
change the nature of the crime •

Kinds of Mitigating Circumstance:

Privileged Mitigating Ordinary Mitigating

Offset by any Cannot be offset by any aggravating Can be offset by a generic

aggravating circumstance aggravating circumstance
circumstance
Effect on the Has the effect of imposing the If not offset, has the effect of
penalty penalty by 1 or 2 degrees lower than imposing the penalty in the
that provided by law minimum period
Kinds Minority, Incomplete Self-defense, Those circumstances
two or more enumerated in paragraph 1 to 10
mitigating circumstances of Article 13
without any
aggravating circumstance (has the
effect of lowering the penalty by one
degree)
IN RELATION TO THE I.S.L.

Privilege mitigating circumstance will apply over and above all other considerations. When you
arrive at the correct penalty, that is the time when you find out whether the Indeterminate Sentence
Law will apply or not.

Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. --

1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites

necessary to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability in the
respective cases are not attendant

• Justifying circumstances

a. Self-defense/defense of relative/defense of stranger – unlawful aggression must

be present for Art 13 to be applicable. Other 2 elements not necessary. If 2
requisites are present – considered a privileged mitigating circumstance.

How, if at all, may incomplete self-defense affect the criminal liability of the offender?

If the question specifically refers to incomplete self-defense, defense of relative or defense of

stranger, you have to qualify your answer.

First, to have incomplete self-defense, the offended party must be guilty of unlawful aggression.
Without this, there can be no incomplete self-defense, defense of relative, or defense of stranger.

Second, if only the element of unlawful aggression is present, the other requisites being absent,
the offender shall be given only the benefit of an ordinary mitigating circumstance.

Third, if aside from the element of unlawful aggression another requisite, but not all, are present,
the offender shall be given the benefit of a privileged mitigating circumstance. In such a case, the
imposable penalty shall be reduced by one or two degrees depending upon how the court regards
the importance of the requisites present. Or absent.

22
 23

b. State of Necessity (par 4) avoidance of greater evil or injury; if any of the last
2 requisites is absent, there’s only an ordinary Mitigating Circumstance.

Example: While driving his car, Juan sees Pedro carelessly crossing the street.
Juan swerves to avoid him, thus hitting a motorbike with 2 passengers, killing them
instantly. Not all requisites to justify act were present because harm done to avoid
injury is greater. Considered as mitigating.

c. Performance of Duty (par 5)

Example: Juan is supposed to arrest Pedro. He thus goes to Pedro’s hideout. Juan
sees a man asleep. Thinking it was Pedro, Juan shot him. Juan may have acted
in the performance of his duty but the crime was not a necessary consequence
thereof. Considered as mitigating.

• Exempting circumstance

a. Minority over 9 and under 15 – if minor acted with discernment, considered Privilege
mitigating

Example: 13 year old stole goods at nighttime. Acted with discernment as shown
by the manner in which the act was committed.

If the offender is proven to have acted with discernment, this is where the court may give
him the benefit of a suspended sentence. He may be given the benefit of a suspended
sentence under the conditions mentioned earlier and only if he would file an application
therefor.

b. Causing injury by mere accident – if 2nd requisite (due care) and 1st part of 4th requisite
(without fault – thus negligence only) are ABSENT, considered as mitigating because
the penalty is lower than that provided for intentional felony.

Example: Police officer tries to stop a fight between Juan and Pedro by firing his
gun in the air. Bullet ricocheted and killed Petra. Officer willfully discharged his gun
but was unmindful of the fact that area was populated.

c. Uncontrollable fear – only one requisite present, considered mitigating

Example: Under threat that their farm will be burned, Pedro and Juan took turns
guarding it at night. Pedro fired in the air when a person in the shadows refused to
reveal his identity. Juan was awakened and shot the unidentified person. Turned
out to be a neighbor looking for is pet. Juan may have acted under the influence
of fear but such fear was not entirely uncontrollable. Considered mitigating.

3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that

committed (Praeter Intentionem)

• Can be used only when the facts prove to show that there is a notable and evident
disproportion between means employed to execute the criminal act and its
consequences

• Judge by considering (1) the weapon used, (2) the injury inflicted and (3) the attitude of
mind when the accuser attacked the other.

Example: Pedro stabbed Tomas on the arm. Tomas did not have the wound treated,
so he died from loss of blood.

• Not applicable when offender employed brute force

Example: Rapist choked victim. Brute force of choking contradicts claim that he had
no intention to kill the girl.

23
 24

• of the three instances where the offender has performed a felony different from that which he
intended. Therefore, this is the product of intentional felony, not a culpable one.

4. That the SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT on the part of the

offended party immediately preceded the act.

• Provocation – any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of
exciting, inciting or irritating anyone.
• Basis: diminution of intelligence and intent

• Requisites:
a. Provocation must be sufficient.
1. Sufficient – adequate enough to excite a person to commit the wrong and must
accordingly be proportionate to its gravity.
2. Sufficiency depends on:
the act constituting the provocation
the social standing of the person provoked
time and place provocation took place
3. Example: Juan likes to hit and curse his servant. His servant thus killed him.
There’s mitigating circumstance because of sufficient provocation.
4. When it was the defendant who sought the deceased, the challenge to fight by
the deceased is NOT sufficient provocation.
b. It must originate from the offended party
1. Why? Law says the provocation is “on the part of the offended party”
2. Example: Tomas’ mother insulted Petra. Petra kills Tomas because of the
insults. No Mitigating Circumstance because it was the mother who insulted her,
not Tomas.

3. Provocation by the deceased in the first stage of the fight is not

Mitigating
Circumstance when the accused killed him after he had fled because the
deceased from the moment he fled did not give any provocation for the accused
to pursue and attack him.
c. Provocation must be immediate to the act., i.e., to the commission of the crime
by the person who is provoked
1. Why? If there was an interval of time, the conduct of the offended party could
not have excited the accused to the commission of the crime, he having had
time to regain his reason and to exercise self-control.
2. Threat should not be offensive and positively strong because if it was, the
threat to inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression which may give rise to self-
defense and thus no longer a Mitigating Circumstance

The commission of the felony must be immediate to the threat or provocation in order that
this circumstance be mitigating. If there is sufficient break of time before the provocation
or threat and the consequent commission of the crime, the law presupposes that during
that interval, whatever anger or diminished self control may have emerged from the
offender had already vanished or disappeared.

This is the correct interpretation of paragraph 4, Article 13. As long as the offender at the time he
committed the felony was still under the influence of the outrage caused by the provocation or
threat, he is acting under a diminished self control. This is the reason why it is mitigating.

You have to look at two criteria:

(1) If from the element of time, there is a material lapse of time stated in the problem and there
is nothing stated in the problem that the effect of the threat or provocation had prolonged
and affected the offender at the time he committed the crime, then you use the criterion
based on the time element.

(2) However, if there is that time element and at the same time, facts are given indicating that
at the time the offender committed the crime, he is still suffering from outrage of the threat
or provocation done to him, then he will still get the benefit of this mitigating circumstance.

24
 25

5. That the act was committed in the IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE

OFFENSE to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sisters, or relatives
by affinity within the same degree.

This has reference to the honor of a person. It concerns the good names and reputation
of the individual. (Pp vs. Anpar, 37 Phil. 201)

1. Requisites:
there’s a grave offense done to the one committing the felony etc.

that the felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense.

2. Lapse of time is allowed between the vindication and the one doing the offense
(proximate time, not just immediately after)

3. Example: Juan caught his wife and his friend in a compromising situation.
Juan kills his friend the next day – still considered proximate.

PROVOCATION VINDICATION
Made directly only to the person Grave offense may be also against the
committing the felony offender’s relatives mentioned by law
Cause that brought about the provocation Offended party must have done a grave
need not be a grave offense offense to the offender or his relatives
Necessary that provocation or threat May be proximate. Time interval allowed
immediately preceded the act. No time
interval
• More lenient in vindication because offense concerns the honor of the person. Such is
more worthy of consideration than mere spite against the one giving the provocation
or threat.

6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have

produced PASSION OR OBFUSCATION

Passion and obfuscation refer to emotional feeling which produces excitement so

powerful as to overcome reason and self-control. It must come from prior unjust or improper acts.
The passion and obfuscation must emanate from legitimate sentiments.

• Passion and obfuscation is mitigating: when there are causes naturally producing in a
person powerful excitement, he loses his reason and self-control. Thereby dismissing
the exercise of his will power.

• PASSION AND OBFUSCATION are Mitigating Circumstances only when the same
arise from lawful sentiments (not Mitigating Circumstance when done in the spirit of
revenge or lawlessness)

• Requisites for Passion & Obfuscation

a. The offender acted on impulse powerful enough to produce passion or obfuscation

b. That the act was committed not in the spirit of lawlessness or revenge

c. The act must come from lawful sentiments

• Act which gave rise to passion and obfuscation

a. That there be an act, both unlawful and unjust

b. The act be sufficient to produce a condition of mind

c. That the act was proximate to the criminal act

25
 26

d. The victim must be the one who caused the passion or obfuscation

• Example: Juan saw Tomas hitting his (Juan) son. Juan stabbed Tomas. Juan is
entitled to Mitigating Circumstance of P&O as his actuation arose from a natural
instinct that impels a father to rush to the rescue of his son.

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.

• 2 Mitigating Circumstances present:

a) voluntarily surrendered

b) voluntarily confessed his guilt

• If both are present, considered as 2 independent mitigating circumstances. Mitigate
penalty to a greater extent

• Requisites of voluntary surrender:

a) offender not actually arrested

b) offender surrendered to a person in authority or the latter’s agent

c) surrender was voluntary

• Surrender must be spontaneous – shows his interest to surrender unconditionally

to the authorities

• Spontaneous – emphasizes the idea of inner impulse, acting without external

stimulus. The conduct of the accused, not his intention alone, after the commission of
the offense, determines the spontaneity of the surrender.

• Not mitigating when warrant already served. Surrender may be considered mitigating
if warrant not served or returned unserved because accused can’t be located.

“The law does not require that the accused surrender prior to the order of arrest,” what matters
is the spontaneous surrender of the accused upon learning that a warrant of arrest had been
issued against him and that voluntary surrender is obedience to the order of arrest is issued
against him.
(Pp vs. Cahilig, 68 Phil. 740)

• Surrender of person required. Not just of weapon.

• Person in authority – one directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or

as a member of some court/government/corporation/board/commission. Barrio
captain/chairman included.

• Agent of person in authority – person who by direct provision of law, or by election,

or by appointment by competent authority is charged with the maintenance of public
order and the protection and security of life and property and any person who comes
to the aid of persons in authority.

• RPC does not make distinction among the various moments when surrender may
occur.

• Surrender must be by reason of the commission of the crime for which defendant is
charged

Voluntary surrender

26
 27

However, there is a ruling that if after committing the crime, the offender did not flee and instead
waited for the law enforcers to arrive and he surrendered the weapon he used in killing the victim,
the ruling was that voluntary surrender is mitigating. In this case, the offender had the opportunity
to go into hiding, the fact that he did not flee is voluntary surrender.

However, if he comes out from hiding because he is seriously ill and he went to get medical
treatment, the surrender is not considered as indicative of remorse or repentance. The surrender
here is only done out of convenience to save his own self. Hence, it is not mitigating.

Even if the offender may have gone into hiding, if the law enforcers had already known where he
is hiding and it is just a matter of time before he is flushed out of that place, then even if the law
enforcers do not know exactly where he was hiding and he would come out, this is not voluntary
surrender.

Whether or not a warrant of arrest had been issued against the offender is immaterial and irrelevant.
The criterion is whether or not the offender had gone into hiding or had the opportunity to go into
hiding and the law enforcers do not know of his whereabouts. If he would give up, his act of
surrendering under such circumstance indicates that he is willing to accept the consequences of
the wrong he has done and also thereby saves the government the effort, the time and the
expenses to be incurred in looking for him.

Surrender to be considered voluntary and thus mitigating, must be spontaneous,

demonstrating an intent to submit himself unconditionally to the person in authority or his agent in
authority, because (1) he acknowledges his guilt (2) he wishes to save the government the trouble
and expenses of searching and capturing him. Where the reason for the surrender of the accused
was to insure his safety, his arrest by policemen pursuing him being inevitable, the surrender is not
spontaneous.

• Requisites for plea of guilty

a) offender spontaneously confessed his guilt

b) confession of guilt was made in open court (competent court)

c) confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution

8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from some
PHYSICAL DEFECT w/c thus restricts his means of action, defense or
communication w/ his fellow beings.

• Basis: one suffering from physical defect which restricts him does not have complete
freedom of action and therefore, there is diminution of that element of voluntariness.

• No distinction between educated and uneducated deaf-mute or blind persons

• The physical defect of the offender should restrict his means of action, defense or
communication with fellow beings, this has been extended to cover cripples, armless
people even stutterers.

• The circumstance assumes that with their physical defect, the offenders do not have
a complete freedom of action therefore diminishing the element of voluntariness in the
commission of a crime.

The physical defect that a person may have must have a relation to the commission of the crime.
Not any physical defect will affect the crime. It will only do so if it has some relation to the crime
committed. This circumstance must also have a bearing on the crime committed and must depend
on how the crime was committed.

9. Such ILLNESS of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the

willpower of the offender w/o depriving him of consciousness of his acts.

• Basis: diminution of intelligence and intent • Requisites:

a) illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-power
b) such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts

27
 28

If the illness not only diminishes the exercise of the offender’s will power but deprives
him of the consciousness of his acts, it becomes an exempting circumstance to be classified as
insanity or imbecility.

• deceased mind, not amounting to insanity, may give place to

mitigation

Feeblemindedness of the accused who, in a fit of jealousy, stabbed his wife, then carried
her up to the house, laid her on the floor and then lay down beside her, warrants the finding in
his favor of this mitigating circumstance. (Pp vs. Formigones, 87 Phil. 658)

10. And ANY OTHER CIRCUMSTANCE of a similar nature and analogous to

those above-mentioned

• Examples of “any other circumstance”:

a) defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is similar to a case of one over
70 years old

b) outraged feeling of owner of animal taken for ransom is analogous to vindication

of grave offense

c) impulse of jealous feeling, similar to PASSION AND OBFUSCATION

d) voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary surrender

e) extreme poverty, similar to incomplete justification based on state of necessity

f) esprit de corps is similar to passion or obfuscation

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

• Definition – Those circumstance which raise the penalty for a crime without exceeding
the maximum applicable to that crime.

• Basis: The greater perversity of the offense as shown by:

a) the motivating power behind the act
b) the place where the act was committed
c) the means and ways used
d) the time
e) the personal circumstance of the offender
f) the personal circumstance of the victim

• Kinds:
a) Generic – generally applicable to all crimes

b) Specific – apply only to specific crimes (ignominy – for chastity crimes; treachery
– for persons crimes)

c) Qualifying – those that change the nature of the crime (evident premeditation –
becomes murder)

d) Inherent – necessarily accompanies the commission of the crime; it is an ele ment

of the crime committed (evident premeditation in theft, estafa)

QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING GENERIC AGGRAVATING

CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE

28
 29

Gives the proper and exclusive name, Increase penalty to the maximum, without
places the author thereof in such a situation exceeding limit prescribed by law
as to deserve no other penalty than that
specifically prescribed by law
Can’t be offset by Mitigating Circumstance May be compensated by Mitigating
Circumstance
Must be alleged in the information. Integral Need not be alleged. May be proved over
part of the offense the objection of the defense. Qualifying if
not alleged will make it generic

Art 14. Aggravating circumstances. — The following are aggravating

circumstances:

1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his PUBLIC POSITION

• Requisite:

a. The offender is a public officer

b. The commission of the crime would not have been possible without the powers, resources
and influence of the office he holds.

2. That the crime be committed IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO THE

PUBLIC AUTHORITIES

• Requisites:
a. The offender knows that a public authority is present

b. The public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions

c. The public authority is not the victim of the crime

d. The public authority’s presence did not prevent the criminal act

• Example: Juan and Pedro are quarrelling and the municipal mayor, upon passing by,
attempts to stop them. Notwithstanding the intervention and the presence of the mayor,
Juan and Pedro continue to quarrel until Juan succeeds in killing Pedro.

• Person in authority – public authority who is directly vested with jurisdiction, has the
power to govern and execute the laws

• Examples of Persons in Authority

a. Governor
b. Mayor
c. Barangay captain
d. Councilors
e. Government agents
f. Chief of Police

• Rule not applicable when committed in the presence of a mere agent.

• Agent – subordinate public officer charged with the maintenance of public order and
protection and security of life and property Example: barrio vice lieutenant, barrio
councilman

3. That the act be committed:

29
 30

(1) with insult or in disregard of the respect due to the offended party on
account of his (A) RANK, (B) AGE, (C) SEX or

• circumstances (rank, age, sex) may be taken into account only in crimes against
persons or honor, it cannot be invoked in crimes against property

• Rank – refers to a high social position or standing by which to determine one’s pay
and emoluments in any scale of comparison within a position

• Age – the circumstance of lack of respect due to age applies in case where the victim
is of tender age as well as of old age (age of the offended party)

• Sex – refers to the female sex, not to the male sex; not applicable when
a. The offender acted w/ PASSION AND OBFUSCATION
b. there exists a relation between the offender and the victim (but in cases of divorce
decrees where there is a direct bearing on their child, it is applicable)
c. the condition of being a woman is indispensable in the commission of the crime
(Ex. Parricide, rape, abduction)

• Requisite of disregard to rank, age, or sex

a. Crimes must be against the victim’s person or his honor

b. There is deliberate intent to offend or insult the respect due to the victim’s rank, age, or
sex

(2) that it be committed in the DWELLING of the offended party, if the latter
has not given provocation.

• Dwelling – must be a building or structure exclusively used for rest and comfort
(combination house and store not included)
a. may be temporary as in the case of guests in a house or bedspacers
b. basis for this is the sanctity of privacy the law accords to human abode

• dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of the staircase and the enclosure under
the house

• Elements of the aggravating circumstance of dwelling

a. Crime occurred in the dwelling of the victim

b. No provocation on the part of the victim

• Requisites for Provocation: ALL MUST CONCUR

a. given by the owner of the dwelling

b. sufficient

c. immediate to the commission of the crime

4. That the act be committed with (1) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE or (2)

OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS

Requisites of Abuse of Confidence Requisite of Obvious Ungratefulness

30
 31

a) Offended party has trusted the offender a) ungratefulness must be obvious, that is, there
must be something which the offender should
b) Offender abused such trust owe the victim a debt of gratitude for

c) Abuse of confidence facilitated the Note: robbery or theft committed by a visitor in

commission of the crime the house of the offended party is aggravated
by obvious ungratefulness

• Example: A jealous lover, already determined to kill his sweetheart, invited her for a
ride and during that ride, he stabbed her

• Abuse of confidence is inherent in:

a. malversation
b. qualified theft
c. estafa by conversion
d. misappropriation
e. qualified seduction

5. That the crime be committed in the PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE,

or in his presence, or when PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE
DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES, or in a PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS
WORSHIP.

• Requirements of the aggravating circumstance of public office:

a. The crime occurred in the public office

b. Public authorities are actually performing their public duties

• Requisites for aggravating circumstances for place of worship:

a. The crime occurred in a place dedicated to the worship of God regardless of religion

b. Offender must have decided to commit the crime when he entered the place of worship
When Paragraph 2 and 5 of Article 14 are applicable
Committed in the presence of the Chief Committed in contempt of Public Authority
Executive, in the Presidential Palace or a (Par. 2, Art 14)
place of worship(Par. 5, Art. 14)
Public authorities are performing of their Same
duties when the crime is committed
When crime is committed in the public Outside the office (still performing duty)
office, the officer must be performing his
duties, except in the Presidential Palace
Public authority may be the offended party Public authority is not be the offended
party

6. (A) That the crime be committed (1) in the NIGHTTIME, or (2) in an

UNINHABITED PLACE (3) by a BAND, whenever such circumstances may
facilitate the commission of the offense.

• Nighttime, Uninhabited Place or by a Band Aggravating when:

a. it facilitated the commission of the crime

b. especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of the crime or for the
purpose of impunity

c. when the offender took the advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity

31
 32

d. commission of the crime must have began and accomplished at nighttime

Uninhabited Place – one where there are no houses at all, a place at a considerable
distance from town, where the houses are scattered at a great distance from each
other

Requisites:
a. The place facilitated the commission or omission of the crime

b. Deliberately sought and not incidental to the commission or omission of the crime

c. Taken advantage of for the purpose of impunity

6. (B) - Whenever more than 3 armed malefactors shall have acted together
in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed
by a BAND.

• Requisites:
a. Facilitated the commission of the crime

b. Deliberately sought

c. Taken advantage of for the purposes of impunity

d. There must be four or more armed men

7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration,

shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE

• Requisites:
a. Committed when there is a calamity or misfortune
1. Conflagration
2. Shipwreck 3. Epidemic

b. Offender took advantage of the state of confusion or chaotic condition from such
misfortune

• Basis: Commission of the crime adds to the suffering by taking advantage of the
misfortune.

• based on time
• offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune
Distinction between Paragraphs 7 and 12 of Article 14
Committed during a calamity or misfortune Committed with the use of wasteful means
Crime is committed DURING any of the Crime is committed BY using fire, inundation,
calamities explosion or other wasteful means
8. That the crime be committed with the AID OF (1) ARMED MEN OR (2)
PERSONS WHO INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY

• based on the means and ways of committing the crime

• Requisites:
a. that armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly

b. that the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was
committed

WITH THE AID OF ARMED MEN BY A BAND

32
 33

Present even if one of the offenders merely Requires more than 3 armed malefactors
relied on their aid. Actual aid is not who all acted together in the commission
necessary of an offense
• if there are more than 3 armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed in the employment
of a band.

9. That the accused is a RECIDIVIST

• Recidivist – one 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 RPC

It is important that the conviction which came earlier must refer to the crime committed earlier than
the subsequent conviction.

• Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his inclination to commit crimes
• Requisites:
a. offender is on trial for an offense

b. he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime

c. that both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same title of the
RPC (not special law)

d. the offender is convicted of the new offense

• What is controlling is the time of the trial, not the time of the commission of the offense.
At the time of the trial means from the arraignment until after sentence is announced
by the judge in open court.

10. That the offender has been previously punished for an offense to which
the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to
which it attaches a lighter penalty

• REITERACION OR HABITUALITY – it is essential that the offender be previously

punished; that is, he has served sentence.

• Par. 10 speaks of penalty attached to the offense, not the penalty actually imposed

REITERACION RECIDIVISM
Necessary that offender shall have served Enough that final judgment has been
out his sentence for the first sentence rendered in the first offense
Previous and subsequent offenses must not Same title
be embraced in the same title of the Code

Not always an aggravating circumstance Always aggravating

• 4 Forms of Repetition
a. Recidivism – generic

b. Reiteracion or Habituality – generic

c. Multiple recidivism or Habitual delinquency – extraordinary aggravating

d. Quasi-Recidivism – special aggravating

Distinctions between recidivism and habitual delinquency

In recidivism –

(1) Two convictions are enough.

33
 34

(2) The crimes are not specified; it is enough that they may be embraced under the same title
of the Revised Penal Code.

(3) There is no time limit between the first conviction and the subsequent conviction.
Recidivism is imprescriptible.

(4) It is a generic aggravating circumstance which can be offset by an ordinary mitigating

circumstance. If not offset, it would only increase the penalty prescribed by law for the
crime committed to its maximum period.

(5) The circumstance need not be alleged in the information.

In habitual delinquency –

(1) At least three convictions are required.

(2) The crimes are limited and specified to: (a) serious physical injuries, (b) less serious
physical injuries, (c) robbery, (d) theft, (e) estafa or swindling and (f) falsification.

(3) There is a time limit of not more than 10 years between every convictions computed from
the first conviction or release from punishment thereof to conviction computed from the
second conviction or release therefrom to the third conviction and so on . . .

(4) Habitual delinquency is a special aggravating circumstance, hence it cannot be offset by

any mitigating circumstance. Aside from the penalty prescribed by law for the crime
committed, an additional penalty shall be imposed depending upon whether it is already
the third conviction, the fourth, the fifth and so on . . .

(5) The circumstance must be alleged in the information; otherwise the court cannot acquire
jurisdiction to impose additional penalty.

• HABITUAL DELINQUENCY – when a person within a period of 10 years from the date
of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robbery, theft, estafa or falsification is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
oftener.

When the offender is a recidivist and at the same time a habitual delinquent, the penalty for the
crime for which he will be convicted will be increased to the maximum period unless offset by a
mitigating circumstance. After determining the correct penalty for the last crime committed, an
added penalty will be imposed in accordance with Article 62.

Habitual delinquency, being a special or specific aggravating circumstance must be alleged in the
information. If it is not alleged in the information and in the course of the trial, the prosecution tried
to prove that the offender is a habitual delinquent over the objection of the accused, the court has
no jurisdiction to consider the offender a habitual delinquent.

• QUASI-RECIDIVISM – 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, shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law
for the new felony

11. That the crime be committed IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD

OR PROMISE.

• Requisites:
a. At least 2 principals
1. The principal by inducement
2. The principal by direct participation

b. the price, reward, or promise should be previous to and in consideration of the

commission of the criminal act

• Applicable to both principals.

34
 35

12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison,

explosion, stranding a vessel or intentional damage thereto, or derailment of
a locomotive, or by use of any other artifice involving GREAT WASTE OR
RUIN.

• Requisite: The wasteful means were used by the offender to accomplish a criminal
purpose

13. That the act be committed with EVIDENT PREMEDITATION

• Essence of premeditation: the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by

cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during
the space of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment

• Requisites:
a. the time when the offender determined to commit the crime

b. an act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination

c. a sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to allow him to reflect
upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution
of his will

14. That (1) CRAFT, (2) FRAUD, OR (3) DISGUISE be employed

• Craft – involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the accused. It is
employed as a scheme in the execution of the crime (e.g. accused pretended to be
members of the constabulary, accused in order to perpetrate rape, used chocolates
containing drugs)

• Fraud –involves insidious words or machinations used to induce victim to act in a

manner which would enable the offender to carry out his design.

• Disguise – resorting to any device to conceal identity. Purpose of concealing identity

is a must.

Distinction between Craft, Fraud, and Disguise

Craft Fraud Disguise
Involves the use of intellectual Involves the use of direct Involves the use of
trickery and cunning to arouse inducement by insidious devise to conceal
suspicion of the victim words or machinations identity
• Requisite: The offender must have actually taken advantage of craft, fraud, or disguise to
facilitate the commission of the crime.

The circumstance is characterized by the intellectual or mental approach, rather than the
physical means to which criminal resorts to carry out his intention.

• Inherent in: estafa and falsification

15. That (1) ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH, or (2)

MEANS BE EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE

• To purposely use excessive force out of the proportion to the means of defense available to the
person attacked.

a. Vs. by a band : circumstance of abuse of superior strength, what is taken into

account is not the number of aggressors nor the fact that they are armed but their
relative physical might vis-à-vis the offended party

35
 36

• Requisite of Means to Weaken Defense

a. Means were purposely sought to weaken the defense of the victim to resist the assault

b. The means used must not totally eliminate possible defense of the victim, otherwise it
will fall under treachery

• To weaken the defense – illustrated in the case where one struggling with another
suddenly throws a cloak over the head of his opponent and while in the said situation,
he wounds or kills him. Other means of weakening the defense would be intoxication
or disabling thru the senses (casting dirt of sand upon another’s eyes)

16. That the act be committed with TREACHERY (alevosia)

• TREACHERY: when the offender commits any of the crime against the person,
employing means, methods 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:
a. that at the time of the attack, the victim was not in the position to defend himself

b. that the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or form of attack
employed by him

• Treachery – can’t be considered when there is no evidence that the accused, prior to
the moment of the killing, resolved to commit to crime, or there is no proof that the
death of the victim was the result of meditation, calculation or reflection.

a. does not exist if the accused gave the deceased chance to prepare or there was
warning given or that it was preceded by a heated argument

b. there is always treachery in the killing of child

c. generally characterized by the deliberate and sudden and unexpected attack of

the victim from behind, without any warning and without giving the victim an
opportunity to defend himself

•
TREACHERY ABUSE OF SUPERIOR MEANS EMPLOYED TO
STRENGTH WEAKEN DEFENSE
Means, methods or forms Offender does not employ Means are employed but it
are employed by the means, methods or forms of only materially weakens the
offender to make it attack, he only takes resisting power of the
impossible or hard for the advantage of his superior offended party
offended party to put any strength
sort of resistance

17. That the means be employed or circumstances brought about which add
IGNOMINY to the natural effects of the acts

• IGNOMINY – is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which adds disgrace and
obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime

Applicable to crimes against chastity (rape included), less serious physical injuries,
light or grave coercion and murder

• Requisites:

36
 37

a. Crime must be against chastity, less serious physical injuries, light or grave coercion,
and murder

b. The circumstance made the crime more humiliating and shameful for the victim

• Examples: accused embraced and kissed the offended party not out of lust but out of
anger in front of many people, raped in front of the husband, raped successively by
five men

• tend to make the effects of the crime more humiliating

Distinction between ignominy and cruelty

Ignominy shocks the moral conscience of man while cruelty is physical. Ignominy refers to the moral
effect of a crime and it pertains to the moral order, whether or not the victim is dead or alive. Cruelty
pertains to physical suffering of the victim so the victim has to be alive. In plain language, ignominy
is adding insult to injury.

Cruelty and ignominy are circumstances brought about which are not necessary in the commission
of the crime.

18. That the crime be committed after an UNLAWFUL ENTRY

• Unlawful entry – when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose.
Meant to effect entrance and NOT exit.

19. That as a means to the commission of the crime, A WALL, ROOF, DOOR
OR WINDOW BE BROKEN

• Requisites:
a. A wall, roof, window, or door was broken

b. They were broken to effect entrance

• Applicable only if such acts were done by the offender to effect entrance.

20. That the crime be committed (1) with the AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15
YEARS of age, or (2) by MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLES, airships or other
similar means.

21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission

• 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. Cruelty cannot be presumed nor merely inferred from the body of the deceased.
Has to be proven.

a. mere plurality of words do not show cruelty

b. no cruelty when the other wrong was done after the victim was dead

• Requisites:
a. that the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong

b. that the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender

IGNOMINY CRUELTY
Moral suffering – subjected to humiliation Physical suffering

37
 38

OTHER AGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:

Organized or syndicated crime group

Under the Influence of Dangerous Drugs

Sec. 17 of B.P. Blg. 179 promulgated on March 2, 1982 provides:

“The provision of any law to the contrary notwithstanding, when a crime is

committed by an offender who is under the influence of dangerous drugs, such
state shall be considered as qualifying aggravating circumstance.”

Use of Unlicensed Firearm

Although the circumstance that human life was destroyed with the use of an unlicensed firearm is
not aggravating under Art. 14, RPC, it may still be taken into consideration to increase the penalty because
of the explicit provisions of the Presidential Decree No. 1866 as amended by R.A. 8294. Section (1), 3rd par.
of said law says that if homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, such use of
an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. Further, under Sec. 3 thereof,
when a person commits any of the crimes defined in the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the use of
explosives like pill box, motolov cocktail bombs, firebombs or other incendiary devices which result in the
death of a person, such use shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

Art 15. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES. Their concept. — Alternative

circumstances are those which must be taken into consideration as
aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime
and the other conditions attending its commission. They are the relationship,
intoxication and the degree of instruction and education of the offender.

The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into

consideration when the offended party is the spouse, ascendant,
descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative by
affinity in the same degrees of the offender.

The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration as a

mitigating circumstances when the offender has committed a felony in a
state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to
commit said felony but when the intoxication is habitual or intentional, it
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

• Alternative Circumstances – those which must be taken into consideration as

aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime and other
conditions attending its commission.

Use only the term alternative circumstance for as long as the particular circumstance is not involved
in any case or problem. The moment it is given in a problem, do not use alternative circumstance,
refer to it as aggravating or mitigating depending on whether the same is considered as such or
the other.

• They are:
a. relationship – taken into consideration when offended party is the spouse,
ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or relative
by affinity in the same degree (2 nd)of the offender

The relationship of step-daughter and step father is included (Pp vs. Tan,264 SCRA 425),
But not of uncle and niece. (People vs. Cabresos, 244 SCRA 362)

38
 39

b. intoxication – mitigating when the offender has committed a felony in the state
of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit the
said felony. Aggravating if habitual or intentional

c. degree of instruction and education of the offender

Except for the circumstance of intoxication, the other circumstances in Article 15 may not be taken
into account at all when the circumstance has no bearing on the crime committed. So the court
will not consider this as aggravating or mitigating simply because the circumstance has no
relevance to the crime that was committed.

It is only the circumstance of intoxication which if not mitigating, is automatically aggravating. But
the other circumstances, even if they are present, but if they do not influence the crime, the court
will not consider it at all. Relationship may not be considered at all, especially if it is not inherent in
the commission of the crime. Degree of instruction also will not be considered if the crime is
something which does not require an educated person to understand.

RELATIONSHIP
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
In crimes against property (robbery, usurpation, In crimes against persons – in cases where the
fraudulent insolvency, arson) offender, or when the offender and the offended
party are relatives of the same level, as killing a
brother, adopted brother or halfbrother.

Always aggravating in crimes against chastity.

Exception: Art 332 of CC – no criminal liability, Sometimes, relationship is a qualifying and not
civil liability only for the crimes of theft, swindling
only a generic aggravating circumstance. In the
or malicious mischief committed or caused crime of qualified seduction, the offended
mutually by spouses, ascendants, descendants woman must be a virgin and less than 18 yrs old.
or relatives by affinity (also brothers, sisters, But if the offender is a brother of the offended
brothers-in-law or sisters-in- woman or an ascendant of the offended woman,
law if living together). It becomes an
regardless of whether the woman is of bad
EXEMPTING circumstance.
reputation, even if the woman is 60 years old or
(1) In the case of an accessory who is more, crime is qualified seduction. In such a
related to the principal within the case, relationship is qualifying.
relationship prescribed in Article 20;

(2) Also in Article 247, a spouse does not

incur criminal liability for a crime of less
serious physical injuries or serious
physical injuries if this was inflicted
after having surprised the offended
spouse or paramour or mistress
committing actual sexual intercourse.
• Relationship neither mitigating nor aggravating when relationship is an element of the
offense.
Example: parricide, adultery, concubinage.

INTOXICATION
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

a) if intoxication is not habitual a) if intoxication is habitual – such habit

must be actual and confirmed
b) if intoxication is not subsequent to the b) if its intentional (subsequent to the plan
plan to commit a felony to commit a felony)

This circumstance is ipso facto mitigating, so that if the prosecution wants to deny the offender the
benefit of this mitigation, they should prove that it is habitual and that it is intentional. The moment
it is shown to be habitual or intentional to the commission of the crime, the same will immediately
aggravate, regardless of the crime committed.

39
 40

• Must show that he has taken such quantity so as to blur his reason and deprive him of
a certain degree of control

Intoxication means that the offender’s mental faculties are affected by drunkenness. It is not the
quantity of alcohol taken by the offender that determines drunkenness. It is the effect of the
alcohol taken by him that matters. If the alcohol taken by him blurs his reason and deprives him
of selfcontrol, then he is intoxicated.

DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

Low degree of instruction / education or the High degree of instruction and education –
lack of it. Because he does not fully realize the offender avails himself of his learning in
consequences of his criminal act. committing the offense.
Not just mere illiteracy but lack of intelligence.

• Exceptions (not mitigating):

a. crimes against property
b. crimes against chastity (rape included)
c. crime of treason

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

The following are criminally liable for light felonies:

1. Principals
2. Accomplices.
This classification is true only under the Revised Penal Code and is not used under special laws,
Accessories – not liable for light felonies because the individual prejudice is so small that
penal sanction is not necessary

• Only natural persons can be criminals as only they can act with malice or negligence
and can be subsequently deprived of liberty. Juridical persons are liable under special
laws.

• Manager of a partnership is liable even if there is no evidence of his direct participation

in the crime.

• Corporations may be the injured party

• General Rule: Corpses and animals have no rights that may be injured.
• Exception: defamation of the dead is punishable when it blackens the memory of one
who is dead.

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

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

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 .

• PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION

40
 41

The principal by direct participation must be at the scene of the crime, personally taking
part in the execution of the same.
Requisites for 2 or more to be principals by direct participation:
a. participated in the criminal resolution (conspiracy)
b. carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly
tended to the same end

• PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION (INDUCEMENT)

a. “Those who directly force or induce others to commit it”

b. Principal by induction liable only when principal by direct participation committed

the act induced

Two ways of becoming a principal by inducement. The first one is by directly forcing
another to commit the crime and the second is by directly inducing another to commit the crime.

• PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION

a. “Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished”

Principals by Indispensable Cooperation are those who cooperate in the commission of the offense
by another act without which it would not have been accomplished. Like in the case of Principal
by Inducement, it presupposes the existence of the principal by direct participation otherwise
with whom shall he cooperate with indispensably?

b. Requisites:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution

2. Cooperation through another act (includes negligence)

The offender in this case must have knowledge of the criminal designs of the principal by direct
participation. Thereafter, he cooperates in the commission of the offense by an act without which
the crime would not have been committed.

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.

• Requisites:
a. there be a community of design (principal originates the design, accomplice only
concurs)

b. he cooperates in the execution by previous or simultaneous acts, intending to give

material and moral aid (cooperation must be knowingly done, it must also be necessary
and not indispensable

c. There be a relation between the acts of the principal and the alleged accomplice

• Examples: a) Juan was choking Pedro. Then Tomas ran up and hit Pedro with a
bamboo stick. Juan continued to choke Pedro until he was dead. Tomas is only an
accomplice because the fatal blow came from Juan.
• b) Lending a dagger to a killer, knowing the latter’s purpose.

• An accomplice has knowledge of the criminal design of the principal and all he does

Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who, having knowledge of

the commission of the crime, and without having participated therein,

41
 42

either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its

commission in any of the following manners:

1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit

by the effects of the crime.

2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the

effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery.

3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of

the principals of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse
of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty
of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the
Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other
crime.

To be an accessory to a crime, one must learn or must have knowledge of the same after
its commission. The crime must have been consummated. His participation must take place
subsequent to such knowledge and in the manner provided under Article 49.

Destroying the corpus delicti

The body of the crime however does not only mean the body of the person killed. This phrase
refers to CORPPUS DELICTI – that is, the body or the substance of the offense (People vs.
Bantagan, 54 Phil. 841). Corpus delicti means the fact that a crime has actually been committed.
(People vs. Madlangbayan, 94 SCRA 685)

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 preceding article.

• Basis: Ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s name which
compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as those mentioned.

• Nephew and Niece not included

• Accessory not exempt when helped a relative-principal by profiting from the effects of
the crime, or assisted the offender to profit from the effects of the crime.
• Only accessories covered by par 2 and 3 are exempted.

• Public officer who helped his guilty brother escape does not incur criminal liability as
ties of blood constitutes a more powerful incentive than the call of duty.

PENALTIES

• PENALTY – suffering inflicted by the State for the transgression of a law.

Five (5) theories that justify the imposition of penalty:

a. Prevention – The State must punish the criminal to prevent or suppress the danger to the
State arising from the criminal acts of the offender;

b. Self-defense – The State has the right to punish the criminal as a measure of self-defense
so as to protect society from the threat and wrong inflicted by the criminal;

42
 43

c. Reformation – The object of punishment in criminal cases is to correct and reform the
offender;

d. Exemplarity – The criminal is punished to serve as an example to deter others from

committing crimes;

e. Justice – That crime must be punished by the State as an act retributive justice, a
vindication of absolute right and moral as violated by the criminal.

Imposition of a penalty has a three-fold purpose:

a. Retribution or expiation – The penalty is commensurate with the gravity of the offense.

b. Correction or reformation – rules which regulate the execution of penalties consisting of

deprivation of liberty

c. Social defense – as manifested by the inflexibilities and severity in the imposition of the
penalty to recidivists and habitual delinquents.

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. — 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.

• When a law is ex post facto a Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the
law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such an act.

b Aggravates the crime or makes it greater than it was when committed.

c Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed
to the crime when committed.

d Alters the legal rules of evidence and authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the crime.

e Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty or
deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful.

f Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful protection to which he has

become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal or a
proclamation of amnesty.

• Bill of Attainder – a legislative act which inflicts punishment without trial. Its essence
is the substitution of a legislative for a judicial determination of guilt.

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.

• Even if injured party already pardoned the offender – fiscal can still prosecute. Not
even considered a ground for dismissal of the information. Exception: Art 344 - crimes
of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness – pardon must be expressed.

43
 44

A pardon given by the offended party does not extinguish criminal action because such
pardon by the offended party is not a ground for dismissal of the complaint or information. A
crime committed is an offense against the State. In criminal cases, the intervention of the
aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for the prosecution, the offended party being
the Republic of the Philippines.

• Only Chief Executive can pardon the offenders

• Can’t compromise criminal liability, only civil liability – but it still shall not extinguish the
public action for the imposition of the legal penalty.

Art. 2034 of the New Civil Code provides: “there may be a compromise upon the civil
liability arising from an offense; but such compromise shall not extinguish the public action
for the imposition of the legal penalty.”

A contract stipulating for the renunciation of the right to prosecute an offense or waiving
the criminal liability is void.

• Offended party in the crimes of adultery and concubinage can’t institute criminal
prosecution if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders.

• Pardon in adultery and concubinage may be implied – continued inaction after learning
of the offense. Must pardon both offenders.

• The pardon afforded the offenders must come BEFORE the institution of the criminal
proceedings. Complaint for any of the above-mentioned crimes in Art 344 will still be
prosecuted by the court on the ground that the pardon (basis for the motion to dismiss)
was given after the filing of the complaint.

• The only act that extinguishes the penal action, after the institution of criminal action,
is the marriage between the offender and the offended party

• Pardon under Art 344 is only a bar to criminal prosecution. It DOES NOT extinguish
criminal liability. It is not one of the causes that totally extinguish criminal liability in Art
89.

• Civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his
express waiver because personal injury may be repaired through indemnity anyway.
State has no reason to insist on its payment.

• Waiver must be express.

Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are not considered penalties. —
The following shall not be considered as penalties:

1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons,

as well as their detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or
illness requiring their confinement in a hospital.

2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions

mentioned in Article 80 and for the purposes specified therein.

3. Suspension from the employment of public office during

the trial or in order to institute proceedings.

4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the

exercise of their administrative disciplinary powers, superior
officials may impose upon their subordinates.

44
 45

5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil

laws may establish in penal form.

• Par 1 refers to the “accused persons” who are detained “by reason of insanity or
imbecility” not an insane or imbecile who has not been arrested for a crime.
• They are not considered penalties because they are not imposed as a result of judicial
proceedings. Those in par 1, 3 and 4 are merely preventive measures before the
conviction of offenders.

• Commitment of a minor is not a penalty because it is not imposed by the court in a

judgment. The imposition of the sentence in such a case is suspended.

• Fines in par 4 are not imposed by the court because otherwise, they constitute a
penalty
Correlating Article 24 with Article 29

Although under Article 24, the detention of a person accused of a crime while the case against him
is being tried does not amount to a penalty, yet the law considers this as part of the imprisonment
and generally deductible from the sentence.

When will this credit apply? If the penalty imposed consists of a deprivation of liberty. Not all who
have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be given a credit

Under Article 24, preventive imprisonment of an accused who is not yet convicted is not a penalty.
Yet Article 29, if ultimately the accused is convicted and the penalty imposed involves deprivation
of liberty, provides that the period during which he had undergone preventive detention will be
deducted from the sentence, unless he is one of those disqualified under the law.

So, if the accused has actually undergone preventive imprisonment, but if he has been convicted
for two or more crimes whether he is a recidivist or not, or when he has been previously summoned
but failed to surrender and so the court has to issue a warrant for his arrest, whatever credit he is
entitled to shall be forfeited.

If the offender is not disqualified from the credit or deduction provided for in Article 29 of the Revised
Penal Code, then the next thing to determine is whether he signed an undertaking to abide by the
same rules and regulations governing convicts. If he signed an undertaking to abide by the same
rules and regulations governing convicts, then it means that while he is suffering from preventive
imprisonment, he is suffering like a convict, that is why the credit is full.

But if the offender did not sign an undertaking, then he will only be subjected to the rules and
regulations governing detention prisoners. As such, he will only be given 80% or 4/5 of the period
of his preventive detention.

Preventive imprisonment is the incarceration undergone by a person accused of a crime

which is not bailable, or he cannot afford to post bond. During the trial of his case, he is detained
in jail. He is known as detention prisoner.

Subsidiary imprisonment, on the other hand, is the personal penalty prescribed by law in
substitution of the payment of fine embodied in the decision when the same cannot be satisfied
because of the culprit’s
insolvency. (People vs. Jarumayan, 52 O.G. 248)

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 Scale:

PRINCIPAL PENALTIES

Capital punishment:
Death.

45
 46

Afflictive penalties:
Reclusion perpetua,
Reclusion temporal,
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Prision mayor.

Correctional penalties:
Prision correccional,
Arresto mayor,
Suspension,
Destierro.

Light penalties:
Arresto menor,
Public censure.

Penalties common to the three preceding classes:

Fine, and
Bond to keep the peace.
ACCESSORY PENALTIES

Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,

Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the
profession or calling.
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense,
Payment of costs.

• Classification of penalties: a Principal b Accessory

Principal penalties are those expressly imposed by the court while Accessory penalties are those
that are deemed included in the principal penalties imposed.

• According to divisibility (principal) a divisible – those that have fixed duration

and are divisible into 3 periods b indivisible – no fixed duration (death, RP, perpetual
or absolute disqualification)

• According to subject matter a corporal – death

b deprivation of freedom – reclusion, prision,
arresto c restriction of freedom – destierro
d deprivation of rights – disqualification and
suspension e pecuniary – fine

• According to gravity a capital b afflictive c correccional d light

• Public censure is a penalty, and being such, is not proper in acquittal. But a
competent court, while acquitting an accused may, with unquestionable propriety
express its disapproval or reprehension of those acts to avoid the impression that by
acquitting the accused it approves or admires his conduct.

• Permanent and temporary absolute and permanent and temporary special

disqualification and suspension may be principal or accessory penalties because
they are found in 2 general classes.

46
 47

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.

• Fines are imposed either as alternative (Art 144 punishing disturbance of

proceedings with arresto mayor or fine from 200 pesos to 1000 pesos) or single (fine
of 200 to 6000 pesos)

• Penalty cannot be imposed in the alternative since it’s the duty of the court to indicate
the penalty imposed definitely and positively. Thus, the court cannot sentence the
guilty person in a manner as such as “to pay fine of 1000 pesos, or to suffer an
imprisonment of 2 years, and to pay the costs.”

• If the fine imposed by the law for the felony is exactly 200 pesos, it is a light felony.

• Fines:
a Afflictive – over 6000 b
Correctional – 201 to 6000
c Light – 200 and less

• Note: The classification applies if the fine is imposed as a single or alternative

penalty. Hence, it does not apply if the fine imposed together with another penalty.

• Bond to keep the peace is by analogy:

a Afflictive – over 6000 b
Correctional – 201 to
6000 c Light – 200 and
less
Distinction between classification of Penalties in Art. 9 and Art. 26
Article 9 Article 26
Applicable in determining the prescriptive Applicable in determining the prescriptive
period of felonies period of penalties
DURATION AND EFFECT OF PENALTIES

Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. —The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be from
twenty years and one day to forty years.

Reclusion temporal. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve

years and one day to twenty years.

Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. — The duration of the penalties

of prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be from six years and
one day to twelve years, except when the penalty of disqualification is
imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case its duration shall be that of
the principal penalty.

Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. — The duration of the penalties

of prision correccional, suspension and destierro shall be from six months
and one day to six years, except when suspension is imposed as an
accessory penalty, in which case, its duration shall be that of the principal
penalty.

Arresto mayor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from
one month and one day to six months.

47
 48

Arresto menor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from
one day to thirty days.

Bond to keep the peace. — The bond to keep the peace shall be required to
cover such period of time as the court may determine.

• 3 fold rule: the maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than 3
times the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed
upon him.
• the maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall in no case exceed 40 years
Three-Fold Rule is to be given effect when the convict is already serving sentence in the
penitentiiary. It is the prison authority who will apply the Three-Fold Rule.

• Temporary disqualification and suspension, when imposed as accessory penalties,

have different durations – they follow the duration of the principal penalty

• Destierro is imposed in the following circumstances: a serious physical

injuries or death under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)

b failure to give bond for good behavior ( a person making threat may be required to
give bond not to molest the person threatened, if not destierro) c penalty for the
concubine

d in cases where the reduction of the penalty by one or more degrees results in
destierro

Destierro is a principal penalty. It is a punishment whereby a convict is vanished to a certan place

and is prohibited form entering or coming near that place designated in the sentence, not less than
25 Kms.. However, the court cannot extend beyond 250 Kms. If the convict should enter the
prohibited places, he commits the crime of evasion of service of sentence under Article 157. But if
the convict himself would go further from which he is vanished by the court, there is no evasion of
sentence because the 250-Km. limit is upon the authority of the court in vanishing the convict

• Bond to keep the peace is not specifically provided as a penalty for any felony and
therefore cannot be imposed by the court. It is required in Art 284 and not to be given
in cases involving other crimes.

• Summary:
a Perpetual penalties (R.P.) – (20 yrs 1day – 40yrs) after 30 years, can be pardoned,
except when he is unworthy of pardon by reason of his conduct and some other
serious cause, it won’t exceed 40 years.

b Reclusion Temporal – 12 yrs and 1 day to 20 yrs

c Prision Mayor and temporary disqualification – 6 yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs;

disqualification if accessory follows the duration of the principal penalty

d Prision Correccional, suspension and destierro – 6 mos and 1 day to 12 yrs;

disqualification if accessory follows the duration of the principal penalty e Arresto
Mayor – 1 month and 1 day to 6 months

f Arresto Menor – 1 day to 30 days

g Bond to keep the peace – the period during which the bond shall be effective is
discretionary to the court

Capital and Afflictive Penalties

48
 49

Death Reclusion Reclusion Prison Mayor

Perpetua Temporal
Term of None 20 years and 1 12 years and 1 6 years and 1 day
Imprisonment day to 40 years day to 20 years to 12 years

Accessory None, unless -Civil Interdiction -Civil -Temporary

Penalties pardoned: or during his Interdiction or absolute
-Perpetual sentence during his disqualification -
absolute sentence Perpetual special
disqualification -Perpetual disqualification
absolute -Perpetual from the right of
-Civil disqualification absolute suffrage which the
interdiction for disqualification offender suffers
30 years
although pardoned
Correctional and Light Penalties
Prison Correctional Arresto Mayor Arresto Menor

Imprisonment 6 months and 1 day to 6 1 month and 1 day to 1 day to 30 days

years 6 months
Accessory -Suspension from public -Suspension of right -Suspension of right
Penalties office to hold office to hold office

-Suspension from the right to -Suspension of the -Suspension of the

follow a profession or calling right of suffrage right of suffrage
during the term of during the term of
-Perpetual the sentence the sentence
special
disqualification on the right
of suffrage
Reclusion perpetua, despite its “defined duration” in R.A. 7659 – 20 years and one day to
40 years – is still to be classified as an indivisible penalty (People vs. Lucas, 232 SCRA 537), and
should be imposed in its entire duration in accordance with Art. 63 of the Revised Penal Cde.
(People vs. Magallano, 266 SCRA 305)

Art. 28. Computation of penalties. — If the offender shall be in prison, the term
of the duration of the temporary penalties shall be computed from the day
on which the judgment of conviction shall have become final.

If the offender be not in prison, the term of the duration of the penalty
consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be computed from the day that the
offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty. The duration of the other penalties shall be
computed only from the day on which the defendant commences to serve
his sentence.

• Director of Prisons/warden to compute based on Art 28:

a When the offender is in prison – the duration of the temporary penalties (PAD,
TAD, detention, suspension) is from the day on which the judgment of conviction
becomes final.

b When the offender is not in prison – the duration of the penalty in deprivation of
liberty is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of judicial
authorities for the enforcement of the penalty

c The duration of the other penalties – the duration is from the day on which the
offender commences to serve his sentence

49
 50

• Reason for rule (a) – because under Art 24, the arrest and temporary detention of the
accused is not considered a penalty

• if in custody, the accused appealed, the service of the sentence should commence
from the date of the promulgation of the decision of the appellate court, not from the
date of the judgment of the trial court was promulgated.

• service of one in prison begins only on the day the judgment of conviction becomes
final.

• In cases if temporary penalties, if the offender is under detention, as when

undergoing preventive imprisonment, rule (a) applies.
• If not under detention (released on bail) rule (c) applies
• Offender under preventive imprisonment, rule (c) applies not rule (a)
• The offender is entitled to a deduction of full-time or 4/5 of the time of his detention.
Art. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment.
— Offenders who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited
in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the
full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment, if the
detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same
disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, except in the following
cases:

1. When they are recidivists or have been convicted

previously twice or more times of any crime; and

2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their

sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily.

If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same

disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in
the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has
undergone preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act 6127, June 17,
1970).

Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a

period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the
offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet
terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the
continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is
under review. In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be
sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of
preventive imprisonment. (As amended by E.O. No. 214, July 10, 1988)

• Accused undergoes preventive suspension if:

a offense is non-bailable b bailable but can’t furnish bail

• the full time or 4/5 of the time during which the offenders have undergone preventive
suspension shall be deducted from the penalty imposed

• preventive imprisonment must also be considered in perpetual penalties. Article does

not make any distinction between temporal and perpetual penalties.

• Credit is given in the service of sentences “consisting of deprivation of liberty”

(imprisonment and destierro). Thus, persons who had undergone preventive
imprisonment but the offense is punishable by a fine only would not be given credit.

• Destierro is considered a “deprivation of liberty”

50
 51

• If the penalty imposed is arresto menor to destierro, the accused who has been in
prison for 30 days (arresto menor - 30 days) should be released because although the
maximum penalty is destierro (6 mos 1 day to 6 yrs), the accused sentenced to such
penalty does not serve it in prison.

The following offenders are not entitled to any deduction of the time of preventive
imprisonment:

1. Recidivists or those previously convicted for two or more times of any crime.

2. Those who, upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence, failed to
surrender voluntarily.
• Habitual Delinquents not entitled to the full time or 4/5 credit of time under preventive
imprisonment since he is necessarily a recidivist or has been convicted previously
twice or more times of any crime.

• Example: X who was arrested for serious physical injuries, detained for 1 year and
went out on bail but was later on found guilty. He was consequently summoned for the
execution of the sentence, but having failed to appear, X will not be credited in the
service of his sentence for serious physical injuries w/ one year or 4/5 of one year
preventive imprisonment.

Art. 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute

disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification for public office shall produce the following effects:

1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which the

offender may have held even if conferred by popular election.

2.The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular
office or to be elected to such office.

3. The disqualification for the offices or public employments

and for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned.

In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is comprised

in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during the term of the sentence.

4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension

for any office formerly held.

• The exclusion is a mere disqualification for protection and not for punishment – the
withholding of a privilege, not a denial of a right.

• Perpetual absolute disqualification is effective during the lifetime of the convict and
even after the service of the sentence.

• Temporary absolute disqualification is effective during the term of sentence and is

removed after the service of the same. Exception: (1) deprivation of the public office
or employment; (2) loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office
formerly held.

• Effects of Perpetual and temporary absolute disqualification: a Deprivation of

any public office or employment of offender b Deprivation of the right to vote in any

election or to be voted upon c Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension

51
 52

d All these effects last during the lifetime of the convict and even after the service of
the sentence except as regards paragraphs 2 and 3 of the above in connection
with Temporary Absolute Disqualification.

Art. 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification.

— The penalties of perpetual or temporal special disqualification for public
office, profession or calling shall produce the following effects:

1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or

calling affected;

2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or

employments either perpetually or during the term of the sentence
according to the extent of such disqualification.

Art. 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification

for the exercise of the right of suffrage. — The perpetual or temporary special
disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage shall deprive the
offender perpetually or during the term of the sentence, according to the
nature of said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular election for any
public office or to be elected to such office. Moreover, the offender shall not
be permitted to hold any public office during the period of his
disqualification.

• Temporary disqualification if imposed as an accessory penalty, its duration is that of

the principal penalty

• Effects of Perpetual and Temporary Special Disqualification

a For public office, profession, or calling

1. Deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected
2. Disqualification for holding similar offices or employment during the
period of disqualification

b For the exercise of the right of suffrage

1. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in an office.
1. Cannot hold any public office during the period of disqualification.

Art. 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office, profession
or calling, or the right of suffrage. — The suspension from public office,
profession or calling, and the exercise of the right of suffrage shall disqualify
the offender from holding such office or exercising such profession or
calling or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. The person
suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having similar
functions during the period of his suspension.

• Effects:
a Disqualification from holding such office or the exercise of such profession or right
of suffrage during the term of the sentence.

b Cannot hold another office having similar functions during the period of
suspension.

52
 53

Art. 34. Civil interdiction. — Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during
the time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship,
either as to the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the
right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such property by
any act or any conveyance inter vivos.

• Effects:
a Deprivation of the following rights:
1. Parental rights
2. Guardianship over the ward
3. Martial authority
4. Right to manage property and to dispose of the same by acts inter vivos
b Civil Interdiction is an accessory penalty to the following principal penalties
1. If death penalty is commuted to life imprisonment
2. Reclusion perpetua

3. Reclusion temporal

• He can dispose of such property by will or donation mortis causa

Art. 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. — It shall be the duty of any person
sentenced to give bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient sureties
who shall undertake that such person will not commit the offense sought to
be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will pay the
amount determined by the court in the judgment, or otherwise to deposit
such amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said
undertaking.

The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of

duration of the bond.

Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall
be detained for a period which shall in no case exceed six months, is he shall
have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed
thirty days, if for a light felony.

• Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bond which is posted for the provisional
release of a person arrested for or accused of a crime. Bond to keep the peace or for
good behavior is imposed as a penalty in threats.

The legal effect of a failure to post a bond to keep the peace is imprisonment either for six
months or 30 days, depending on whether the felony committed is grave or less grave on one hand,
or it is light only on the other hand. The legal effect of failure to post a bond for good behavior is
not imprisonment but destierro under Article 284.

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.

• Pardon by the President does not restore the right to public office or suffrage except
when both are expressly restored in the pardon. Nor does it exempt from civil
liability/from payment of civil indemnity.

53
 54

• Limitations to President’s power to pardon: a can be exercised only after

final judgment b does not extend to cases of impeachment

c does not extinguish civil liability – only criminal liability

• General rule:Pardon granted in general terms does not include accessory penalties.
• Exceptions:

a. If the absolute pardon is granted after the term of imprisonment has expired, it
removes all that is left of the consequences of conviction. However, if the penalty
is life imprisonment and after the service of 30 years, a pardon is granted, the
pardon does not remove the accessory penalty of absolute perpetual
disqualification
b. if the facts and circumstances of the case show that the purpose of the President
is to precisely restore the rights i.e., granting absolute pardon after election to a
post (mayor) but before the date fixed by law for assuming office to enable him to
assume the position in deference to the popular will

Pardon must be accepted

Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the Chief Executive, which exempts the
individual upon whom it is bestowed from the punishment which the law inflicts for the crime he
has committed. It is a private, though official, act of the Chief Executive delivered to the individual
for whose benefit it is not intended. It is a deed, to the validity of which delivery is essential, and
delivery is not complete without acceptance. Until delivery, all that may have been done is a
matter of intended favor, and the pardon may be cancelled to accord with the change of intention.
If cancelled before acceptance, it has no effect.

Effects of Pardon

There are two kinds of pardon that may be extended by the President. The first one is
known as conditional pardon. This pardon contemplates of a situation wherein the offender is
granted temporary liberty under certain conditions. If he violates the conditions of this pardon,
he commits a crime known as evasion of service of sentence.

Then we have absolute pardon – when an absolute pardon is granted, it releases the
offender from the punishment imposed by the court on him, so that in the eyes of the law, the
offender is innocent as if he had never committed the offense. It removes the penalties and
disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights. It makes him a new man and gives him a new
credit and capacity.

Pardon relieves the offender from the consequences of an offense for which he has been
convicted, that it, it abolishes or forgives the punishment, subject to exceptions mentioned in Art.
36.

• Pardon by the offended party – does not extinguish criminal liability, may include
offended party waiving civil indemnity and it is done before the institution of the criminal
prosecution and extended to both offenders.

Pardon by the Chief Executive distinguished from pardon by the offended party:

1. Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes the criminal liability of the offender;
such is not the case when the pardon is given by the offended party.

2. Pardon by the Chief Executive cannot include civil liability which the offender must pay;
but the offended party can waive the civil liability which the offender must pay.

3. In cases where the law allows pardon by the offended party, the pardon should be given
before the institution of criminal prosecution and must be extended to both offenders.

54
 55

This is not true for pardon extended by the Chief Executive for the same may be extended
to offenders whether the crime committed is public or private offense.

Art. 37. Cost. — What are included. — Costs shall include fees and indemnities
in the course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed or unalterable
amounts previously determined by law or regulations in force, or amounts
not subject to schedule.

• Costs include:
a. fees
b. indemnities in the course of judicial proceedings

• Costs (expenses of the litigation) are chargeable to the accused in case of conviction.

• In case of acquittal, the costs are de oficio, each party bearing is own expense

• No costs allowed against the Republic of the Philippines until law provides the contrary

Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities. — Order of payment. — In case the property of

the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order:

1. The reparation of the damage caused.

2. Indemnification of consequential damages.

3. The fine.

4. The cost of the proceedings.

Pecuniary liability as contemplated under Art. 38 includes both civil liabilities and pecuniary
penalties except the civil liability of restitution because this is an exclusive liability.

Civil liability consists of reparation and indemnification while pecuniary penalty consists of
fine imposed by the court.

It is worth noting, as will further be discussed under Art. 89, that the death of the offender
before final judgment extinguishes the pecuniary penalty but not the civil liability included in his
pecuniary liabilities.

• Applicable “in case property of the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of
all his pecuniary liabilities.” Hence, if the offender has insufficient or no property, there
is no use for Art 38.

• Order of payment is mandatory

• Example: Juan inflicted serious physical injuries against Pedro and took the latter’s
watch and ring. He incurred 500 worth of hospital bills and failed to earn 300 worth of
salary. Given that Juan only has 1000 pesos worth of property not exempt from
execution, it shall be first applied to the payment of the watch and ring which cannot
be returned as such is covered by “reparation of the damage caused” thus, no. 1 in
the order of payment. The 500 and 300 are covered by “indemnification of the
consequential damage” thus, no. 2 in the order of payment.

55
 56

Art. 39. Subsidiary penalty. — If the convict has no property with which to
meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the next preceding article, he
shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for
each eight pesos, subject to the following rules:

1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional

or arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine
referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of
the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more than one
year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the
prisoner.

2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the

subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit
shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and
shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony.

3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision

correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon
the culprit.

4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by

confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed
duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the
preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as
those of which the principal penalty consists.

5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may

have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him,
from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve.
(As amended by RA 5465, April 21, 1969.)

• There is no subsidiary penalty for non-payment of reparation, indemnification and

costs in par 1, 2 and 4 of Art 38. It is only for fines.

Article 39 deals with subsidiary penalty. There are two situations there:

(1) When there is a principal penalty of imprisonment or any other principal penalty and it
carries with it a fine; and

(2) When penalty is only a fine.

Therefore, there shall be no subsidiary penalty for the non-payment of damages to the offended
party.

• Art 39 applies only when the convict has no property with which to meet the fine in par
3 of art 38. Thus, a convict who has property enough to meet the fine and not exempted
from execution cannot choose to serve the subsidiary penalty instead of the payment
of the fine.

In People v. Subido, it was held that the convict cannot choose not to serve, or not to pay the fine
and instead serve the subsidiary penalty. A subsidiary penalty will only be served if the sheriff
should return the execution for the fine on the property of the convict and he does not have the
properties to satisfy the writ.

• Subsidiary imprisonment is not an accessory penalty. It is covered by Art 40-45 of this

Code. Accessory penalties are deemed imposed even when not mentioned while
subsidiary imprisonment must be expressly imposed.

56
 57

A subsidiary penalty is not an accessory penalty. Since it is not an accessory penalty, it must be
expressly stated in the sentence, but the sentence does not specify the period of subsidiary penalty
because it will only be known if the convict cannot pay the fine. The sentence will merely provide
that in case of non-payment of the fine, the convict shall be required to save subsidiary penalty. It
will then be the prison authority who will compute this. If the judgment is silent, he cannot suffer
any subsidiary penalty.

• Rules:
PENALTY IMPOSED LENGTH OF SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
Prision correccional or arresto and fine Not exceed 1/3 of term of sentence, in no case
more than 1 year fraction or part of a day not
counted.
Fine only Not to exceed 6 months if prosecuted for grave
or less grave felony, not to exceed 15 days if
prosecuted for light felony
Higher than prision correccional No subsidiary imprisonment
Not to be executed by confinement but of Same deprivations as those of the principal
fixed duration penalty under rules 1, 2 and 3 above
When is subsidiary penalty applied

(1) If the subsidiary penalty prescribed for the non-payment of fine which goes with the
principal penalty, the maximum duration of the subsidiary penalty is one year, so there is
no subsidiary penalty that goes beyond one year. But this will only be true if the one year
period is higher than 1/3 of the principal penalty, the convict cannot be made to undergo
subsidiary penalty more than 1/3 of the duration of the principal penalty and in no case will
it be more than 1 year - get 1/3 of the principal penalty - whichever is lower.

(2) If the subsidiary penalty is to be imposed for non payment of fine and the principal penalty
imposed be fine only, which is a single penalty, that means it does not go with another
principal penalty, the most that the convict will be required to undergo subsidiary
imprisonment is six months, if the felony committed is grave or less grave, otherwise, if the
felony committed is slight, the maximum duration of the subsidiary penalty is only 15 days.

Do not consider the totality of the imprisonment the convict is sentenced to but consider the totality
or the duration of the imprisonment that the convict will be required to serve under the Three-Fold
Rule. If the totality of the imprisonment under this rule does not exceed six years, then, even if the
totality of all the sentences without applying the Three-Fold Rule will go beyond six years, the
convict shall be required to undergo subsidiary penalty if he could not pay the fine.

• If financial circumstances improve, convict still to pay the fine even if he has suffered
subsidiary personal liability.

• the penalty imposed must be PC, AM, Am, suspension, destierro and fine only. – other
than these (PM, RT, RP) court cannot impose subsidiary penalty.

• Even if the penalty imposed is not higher than PC, if the accused is a habitual
delinquent who deserves an additional penalty of 12 yrs and 1 day of RT, there is no
subsidiary imprisonment.

Subsidiary imprisonment can be applied to the fine imposed for violation of special penal laws.
This is authorized by Art. 1732 and by Art. 10 which makes the Revised Penal Code applicable to
special laws.

Art. 40. Death — Its accessory penalties. — The death penalty, when it is not
executed by reason of commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil interdiction during thirty
years following the date sentence, unless such accessory penalties have
been expressly remitted in the pardon.

57
 58

Art. 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal. — Their accessory penalties.
— The penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry
with them that of civil interdiction for life or during the period of the sentence
as the case may be, and that of perpetual absolute disqualification which the
offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the principal penalty,
unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.

Art. 42. Prision mayor — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision
mayor, shall carry with it that of temporary absolute disqualification and that
of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage which the
offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless
the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.

Art. 43. Prision correccional — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision
correccional shall carry with it that of suspension from public office, from
the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special
disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration of said
imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer the
disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the principal
penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
Art. 44. Arresto — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of arresto shall carry
with it that of suspension of the right too hold office and the right of suffrage
during the term of the sentence.

• Outline of accessory penalties inherent in principal penalties

a. death – if not executed because of commutation or pardon
1. perpetual absolute disqualification
2. civil interdiction during 30 years (if not expressly remitted in the pardon)

b. RP and RT
1. civil interdiction for life or during the sentence
2. perpetual absolute disqualification (unless expressly remitted in the pardon)

c. PM
1. temporary absolute disqualification
2. perpetual absolute disqualification from suffrage (unless expressly remitted in
the pardon)

d. PC
1. suspension from public office, profession or calling
2. perpetual special disqualification from suffrage if the duration of the
imprisonment exceeds 18 months (unless expressly remitted in the pardon)

• The accessory penalties in Art 40-44 must be suffered by the offender, although
pardoned as to the principal penalties. To be relieved of these penalties, they must be
expressly remitted in the pardon.

• No accessory penalty for destierro

• Persons who served out the penalty may not have the right to exercise the right of
suffrage. For a prisoner who has been sentenced to one year of imprisonment or more
for any crime, absolute pardon restores to him his political rights. If the penalty is less
than one year, disqualification does not attach except if the crime done was against
property.

58
 59

• The nature of the crime is immaterial when the penalty imposed is one year
imprisonment or more.

• The accessory penalties are understood to be always imposed upon the offender by
the mere fact that the law fixes a certain penalty for the crime. Whenever the courts
impose a penalty which by provision of law, carries with it other penalties, it’s
understood that the accessory penalties are also imposed.

• the accessory penalties do not affect the jurisdiction of the court in which the
information is filed because they don’t modify or alter the nature of the penalty provided
by law. What determines jurisdiction in criminal cases is the extent of the principal
penalty w/c the law imposes of the crime charged.

• the MTC has exclusive jurisdiction over offenses punishable with imprisonment of not
exceeding 4 years and 2 months or a fine of not more than 4000 or both regardless of
other imposable accessory or other penalties.

Art. 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime.
— Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with it
the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools with
which it was committed.

Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and

forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be property of a third
person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of
lawful commerce shall be destroyed.

• every penalty imposed carries with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the
instruments or tools used in the commission of the crime

• proceeds and instruments/tools of the crime are confiscated in favor of the government

• 3rd persons’ (not liable for the offense) property is not subject to confiscation and
forfeiture

• property not subject of lawful commerce (whether it belongs to accused or 3 rd person)

shall be destroyed.

• can’t confiscate/forfeit unless there’s a criminal case filed and tried, and accused is
acquitted.

• must indict 3rd person to order confiscation of his property

• instruments of the crime belonging to innocent 3 rd person may be recovered

• confiscation can be ordered only if the property is submitted in evidence or placed at

the disposal of the court

• articles which are forfeited - when the order of forfeiture is already final, can’t be
returned even in case of an acquittal

• confiscation and forfeiture are additional penalties. Where the penalty imposed did not
include the confiscation of the goods involved, the confiscation & forfeiture of said
goods would be an additional penalty and would amount to an increase of the penalty
already imposed, thereby placing the accused in double jeopardy.

• when the accused has appealed, confiscation and forfeiture not ordered by the trial
court may be imposed by the appellate court

59
 60

• the government can’t appeal the modification of a sentence if the defendant did not
appeal. But if the defendant appeals, it removes all bars to the review and correction

of the penalty imposed by the court below, even if an increase thereof should be the
result.

Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. — The penalty

prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the
principals in the commission of such felony.

Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony in general terms, it

shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony.

• General rule: The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be imposed: a
upon the principals b for consummated felony
• Exception: when the law fixes a penalty for the frustrated or attempted felony.

Whenever it is believed that the penalty lower by one or two degrees corresponding to
said acts of execution is not proportionate to the wrong done, the law fixes a distinct
penalty for the principal in the frustrated or attempted felony.

• The graduation of penalties refers to: a stages of execution (consummated,

frustrated, attempted)
b degree of the criminal participation of the offender (principal, accomplice,
accessory)

• the division of a divisible penalty (min, med, max) refers to the proper period of the
penalty which should be imposed when aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend
the commission of the crime.

Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed; Automatic review
of death penalty cases. – The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in
which it must be imposed under existing laws, except when the guilty person
is below eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the crime
or is more than seventy (70) years of age or when upon appeal or automatic
review of the case by the Supreme Court, the required majority vote is not
obtained for the imposition of the death penalty, in which cases the penalty
shall be reclusion perpetua.

In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the trial court, the
records shall be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review and
judgment by the court en banc, within twenty (20) days but not earlier than
fifteen (15) days after promulgation of the judgment or notice of denial of any
motion for new trial or consideration. The transcript shall also be forwarded
within ten (10) days after the filing thereof by the stenographic reporter. (As
amended by Sec. 22, RA 7659).

• whenever the judgment of the lower court imposes the death penalty, the case shall
be determined by 10 justices of the court. When 10 justices fail to reach a decision (as
to the propriety of the imposition of the death penalty), the penalty next lower in degree
than the death penalty shall be imposed.

• Death penalty not imposed in the ff cases:

a. when the person is more than 70 years old at time RTC sentenced him

60
 61

b. when upon appeal or revision of the case by the SC, 10 justices are not unanimous
in their voting

c. when the offender is a minor under 18 yrs of age. Why? Because minority is always
a mitigating circumstance

d. while a woman is pregnant and within one year after delivery

• Justification for the death penalty: social defense and exemplarity. Not considered cruel
and unusual because does not involve torture or lingering death.

• Crimes where death penalty is imposed:

a. treason
b. certain acts of espionage under Commonwealth Act 616
c. correspondence w/ hostile country when it contains notice or information and the
intention of the offender is to aid the enemy
d. qualified piracy
e. certain violations of the Anti-subversion act
f. parricide
g. murder
h. kidnapping and serious illegal detention
i. robbery w/ homicide
j. rape w/ homicide
k. when death resulted from the commission of arson or other crime involving
destruction

• trial court must require the prosecution to present evidence, despite plea of guilty,
when the crime charged is punished by death. A sentence of death is valid only if it is
susceptible of a fair and reasonable examination by the court. This is impossible if no
evidence of guilt was taken after a plea of guilty.

Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. — When a single act constitutes two or
more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means
for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be
imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.

• The 2 or more grave or less grave felonies must be the result of a single act, or an offense
must be a necessary means to commit the crime.

• Complex crime – one crime only as there is only one criminal intent – only one
information need be filed

• 2 kinds of complex crimes:

a. compound crime – single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies
Requisites:
1) that only one single act is committed by the offender

2) that the single act produces

a) 2 or more grave felonies
b) one or more grave and one or more less grave felonies
c) 2 or more less grave felonies

b. complex crime proper – when an offense is a necessary means for committing

another

Requisites:
1) that at least 2 offenses are committed

61
 62

2) that one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other

3) that both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute

62
 63
Codal and Notes in CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I by RENE CALLANTA

•
No single act in the following cases:

a) When 2 persons are killed one after the other, by different acts, although these 2
killings were the result of a single criminal impulse, the different acts must be
considered as distinct crimes.

b) When the acts are wholly different, not only in themselves, but also because they
are directed against 2 different persons, as when one fires his gun twice in
succession, killing one and injuring the other.

When an offender performed more than one act, although similar, if they result in separate crimes,
there is no complex crime at all, instead, the offender shall be prosecuted for as many crimes as
are committed under separate information.

When the single act brings about two or more crimes, the offender is punished with only one
penalty, although in the maximum period, because he acted only with single criminal impulse. if
there is only one criminal impulse which brought about the commission of the crime, the offender
should be penalized only once. In this case it is not the singleness of the act but the singleness of
the impulse that has been considered

• Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished as separate
offenses or may be absorbed by the grave felony.

Examples:
a. several light felonies resulting from one single act – not complex
Juan hit Pedro’s car, resulting in several light injuries and light felony of damage
to property. No complex crime because the crime of slight physical injuries and
damage to property are light felonies. There are as many crimes as there are
persons injured w/ light physical injuries and as many penalties as there are light
felonies committed, even though they are produced by a single act of the offender.

b. when the crime is committed by force or violence, slight physical injuries are
absorbed.

• Examples of complex crimes:

a. Juan was a barangay captain who was killed while discharging his duty, the crime
is a complex crime of homicide w/ assault upon a person of authority.

b. Juan raped Petra, causing her physical injuries w/c required a month’s worth of
medical attention. This is a complex crime of rape w/ less serious physical injuries.
The injuries were necessary to the commission of the rape.

• when in obedience to an order, several accused simultaneously shot many persons,

without evidence how many each killed, there is only a single offense, there being a
single criminal impulse.

Effect of conspiracy in the commission of a complex crime. When a conspiracy animates several
persons in the attainment of a single purpose, and in the process, several persons perform various
acts in the attainment of said purpose, their individual acts are treated as a single act. The
felonious agreement produces a sole and solidary liability.

• when various acts are executed for the attainment of a single purpose w/c constitutes
an offense, such acts must be considered only as one offense.

Example: Juan falsified 100 warehouse receipts from April to June which enabled him
to swindle the bank of 100 million. There’s only one complex crime of estafa through
multiple falsification of documents.

• There is no complex crime of arson w/ homicide

63
 64
Codal and Notes in CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I by RENE CALLANTA

•
Art 48 is applicable to crimes through negligence

Example: Juan lit a cigarette as he poured gas in the tank of his car in his garage. The
gas caught fire and the house burned. His sister died and the maid suffered serious
physical injuries. The crimes of arson, homicide, serious physical injuries and damage
to property constitute a complex crime. There is only one penalty but there are 3 civil
liabilities.

Article 48 also applies in cases when out of a single act of negligence or imprudence, two or more
grave or less grave felonies resulted, although only the first part thereof (compound crime). The
second part of Article 48 does not apply, referring to the complex crime proper because this applies
or refers only to a deliberate commission of one offense to commit another offense.

• No complex crime when one of the offenses is penalized by a special law

Article 48 is not applicable when the crimes committed are made punishable by different
laws.

Mala prohibita and mala in se cannot be grouped together to form a complex crime under
Article 48

• Example of complex crime proper (at least 2 crimes must be committed):

Kidnapping the victim to murder him in a secluded place – ransom wasn’t paid so
victim was killed. Kidnapping was a necessary means to commit murder. But where
the victim was taken from his home for the sole purpose of killing him and not for
detaining him illegally or for the purpose of ransom, the crime is simple murder.

• “Necessary means” does not mean “indispensable means”. Indispensable would

mean it is an element of the crime. The crime can be committed by another mean. The
means actually employed (another crime) was merely to facilitate and insure the
consummation of the crime.

“Necessary” should not be understood as indispensable, otherwise, it shall be considered

absorbed and not giving rise to a complex crime.

• When in the definition of a felony, one offense is a means to commit the other, there
is no complex crime.

Ex. Murder committed by means of fire. Murder can be qualified by the circumstance
of fire so no complex crime even if Art 321 and 324 punishes arson. It’s plain and
simple murder.

There is no disagreement that when a crime is committed because it is necessary to

commit another crime, it is a complex crime and Article 48 is made applicable. However, the crime
committed is an element of the other crime, then it is not considered a separate crime but is
absorbed by the other crime.

• Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is a direct means to commit a grave
offense. Like rape, there is no complex crime of trespass to dwelling with rape.
Trespass will be considered as aggravating (unlawful entry or breaking part of a
dwelling)

• No complex crime when one offense is committed to conceal another

Example: Juan set the school on fire after committing homicide. 2 crimes.

• When the offender had in his possession the funds w/c he misappropriated, the
falsification of a public or official document involving said funds is a separate offense.
But when the offender had to falsify a public or official document to obtain possession

64
 65
Codal and Notes in CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I by RENE CALLANTA

•
of the funds w/c he misappropriated, the falsification is a necessary means to commit
the malversation.

There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder, arson, robbery or other common
crimes. They are mere ingredients of the crime of rebellion – absorbed already.

When the crime of murder, arson and robbery are committed in the furtherance of the
crime of rebellion, it is not a complex crime of rebellion with murder, arson and robbery. The
crime committed is simple rebellion. The crimes of murder, arson and robbery are treated as
elements of rebellion. Note however, that in order that said crimes may be absorbed, it is
necessary that the same were done in furtherance of the crime of rebellion. (Pp vs. Geronimo)

• When 2 crimes produced by a single act are respectively within the exclusive
jurisdiction of 2 courts of different jurisdiction, the court of higher jurisdiction shall try
the complex crime.

Example: Although the forcible abduction which was supposedly commenced in

Manila was not proven, and although the rape which was proven was actually
committed in Cavite, still the RTC of Manila had jurisdiction to convict the accused of
rape. The complex crime of forcible abduction with rape was charged in the complaint
on the basis of which the case was tried.

In criminal procedure, it is prohibited to charge more than one offense in an information, except
when the crimes in one information constitute a complex crime or a special complex crime.

So whenever the Supreme Court concludes that the criminal should be punished only once,
because they acted in conspiracy or under the same criminal impulse, it is necessary to embody
these crimes under one single information. It is necessary to consider them as complex crimes
even if the essence of the crime does not fit the definition of Art 48, because there is no other
provision in the RPC.

• Art. 48 is intended to favor the culprit.

• The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime, the same to
be applied in its maximum period. If the different crimes resulting from one single act
are punished with the same penalty, the penalty for any one of them shall be imposed,
the same to be applied in the maximum period. The same rule shall be observed when
an offense is a necessary means to commit the other.
If by complexing the crime, the penalty would turn out to be higher, do not complex anymore.

Example: Murder and theft (killed with treachery, then stole the right).
Penalty: If complex – Reclusion temporal maximum to death.
If treated individually – Reclusion temporal to Reclusion Perpetua.

Complex crime is not just a matter of penalty, but of substance under the Revised Penal Code.

• A complex crime of the second form may be committed by two persons.

• But when one of the offenses, as a means to commit the other, was committed by one
of the accused by reckless imprudence, the accused who committed the crime by
reckless imprudence is liable for his acts only.

Example: Juan cooperated in the commission of the complex offense of estafa through
falsification by reckless imprudence by acts without which it could not have been
accomplished, and this being a fact, there would be no reason to exculpate him from
liability. Even assuming he had no intention to defraud Tomas if his codefendants
succeeded in attaining the purpose sought by the culprits, Juan’s participation together
w/ the participation of his co-defendants in the commission of the offense completed

65
 66
Codal and Notes in CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I by RENE CALLANTA

•
all the elements necessary for the perpetration of the complex crime of estafa through
falsification of documents.

• When two felonies constituting a complex crime are punishable by imprisonment and
fine, respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment shall be imposed.

66
• When a single act constitutes two grave or less grave or one grave and another less
grave, and the penalty for one is imprisonment while that for the other is fine, the
severity of the penalty for the more serious crime should not be judged by the
classification of each of the penalties involved, but by the nature of the penalties.

Example: Even if the fine for damage to property through reckless imprudence is
P40,000, an afflictive penalty, and the penalty for the physical injuries resulting from
the same act is only 4 mos of arresto mayor, a correccional penalty may be imposed.

• In the order of severity of the penalties, arresto mayor and arresto menor are
considered more severe than destierro and arresto menor is higher in degree than
destierro.
• Fine is not included in the list of penalties in the order of severity and it is the last in
the order.

• Art 48 applies only to cases where the Code doesn’t provide a specific penalty for a
complex crime.

• Art 48 doesn’t apply when the law provides one single penalty for single complex
crimes like the ff: (composite crimes) a) robbery w/ homicide
b) robbery w/ rape
c) kidnapping w/ serious physical injuries
d) rape w/ homicide

A composite crime is one in which substance is made up of more than one crime, but which in
the eyes of the law is only a single indivisible offense. This is also known as special complex
crime.

• When a complex crime is charged and one offense is not proven, the accused can be
convicted of the other.

• Plurality of crimes – consists in the successive execution by the same individual of

different criminal acts upon any of w/c no conviction has yet been declared.

• Kinds of plurality of crimes:

a) formal or ideal – only one criminal liability
b) real or material – there are different crimes in law as well as in the conscience of
the offender, in such cases, the offender shall be punished for each and every
offense that he committed.

Example: Juan stabbed Pedro, then Juan stabbed Tomas too. There are 2 committed
as 2 acts were performed.

When the plurality of crimes is covered by a specific provision of law and declares that such
aggrupation is but a single crime and provides a specific penalty for its commission, Art. 48 should
not be made to apply. When there is no law that covers the combination of the crimes committed,
then Art. 48 will apply.
PLURALITY OF CRIMES RECIDIVISM
No conviction of the crimes committed There must be conviction by final judgment of
the first prior offense
• Formal/ideal plural crimes are divided into 3 groups: (a person committing multiple
crimes is punished w/ one penalty in the ff cases)
a) when the offender commits any of the complex crimes defined in art 48
b) when the law specifically fixes a single penalty for 2 or more offenses committed:
robbery w/ homicide, kidnapping w/ serious physical injuires
c) when the offender commits continued crimes

• Continued crimes – refers to a single crime consisting of a series of acts but all arising
from one criminal resolution. Although there is a series of acts, there is only one crime
committed, so only one penalty shall be imposed.

67
A “continued crime” is one where the offender performs a series of acts violating one and the
same penal provision committed at the same place and about the same time for the same criminal
purpose, regardless of a series of acts done, it is regarded in law as one.

When the actor, there being unity of purpose and of right violated, commits diverse acts,
each of which, although of a delictual character, merely constitutes a partial delict, such
occurrence of delictual acts is called “delicto continuado”.” (Gamboa vs. Court of Appeals, 68
SCRA 314)

• Examples of continued crimes:

a) a collector of a commercial firm misappropriates for his personal use several
amounts collected by him from different persons. There is only one crime because
the different and successive appropriations are but the different moments during
which one criminal resolution arises.
b) Juan stole 2 books belonging to 2 different persons. He commits only one crime
because there is unity of thought in the criminal purpose of the offender.

• A continued crime is not a complex crime as offender does not perform a single act
but a series of acts. Therefore:
a) penalty not to be imposed in the maximum
b) no actual provision punishing a continued crime – it’s a principle applied in
connection w/ 2 or more crimes committed w/ a single intention.

• Continued crime is different from a transitory crime. Transitory crime is “moving

crime”.

Example: kidnapping someone for ransom and moving him to another venue. The
offenders can be prosecuted and tried in either of the 2 areas.
REAL/MATERIAL PLURALITY CONTINUED CRIME
There is a series of acts performed by the Same
offender
Each act performed constitutes a separate Different acts constitute only one crime
crime because each act is generated by a because all of the acts performed arise from
criminal impulse one criminal resolution.
In the theft cases, the trend is to follow the single larceny doctrine, that is taking of several things,
whether belonging to the same or different owners, at the same time and place, constitutes one
larceny only.

Defamation cases

A libelous publication affecting more than one person constitutes as many crimes as there
are offended parties. The crime is not complex even though there was only one act of publication.

Where the defamatory statement was uttered only once on a single occasion against a
group of persons not mentioned individually, the act constitutes only one offense.

Art. 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is
different from that intended. — In cases in which the felony committed is
different from that which the offender intended to commit, the following rules
shall be observed:

1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that
corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit, the
penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period.

2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that
corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit, the penalty
for the former shall be imposed in its maximum period.

68
3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be
applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an
attempt or frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a higher penalty
for either of the latter offenses, in which case the penalty provided for the
attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its maximum period.

• Art 49 has reference to the provision in the 1st par of Art 4 which provides that criminal
liability shall be incurred “by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act
done be different from that which he intended”

• Art 49 applicable only in cases when there is a mistake in identity of the victim of the
crime and the penalty for the crime committed is different from that for the crime
intended to be committed.

• Art 49 also has no application where a more serious consequence not intended by the
offender befalls the same person.

Example: Juan only wanted to inflict a wound upon Pedro but because he lost control
of his right arm, he killed Pedro. Art 49 not applicable.
ART 49 ART 48
Lesser penalty to be imposed in its maximum pd Penalty for the more serious crime shall be
imposed in its maximum pd
Notes:
1. Art. 49 has reference to Art. 4(1). It applies only when there is error in personae.

2. In Art. 49 (Paragraphs 1 and 2) the lower penalty in its maximum period is always
imposed.

3. In Par. 3 the penalty for the attempted or frustrated crime shall be imposed in its
maximum period. This rule is not necessary and may well be covered by Art. 48, in
view of the fact that the same act also constitutes an attempt or a frustration of another
crime.

Art. 50. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime. —

The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principal in a frustrated
felony.

Art. 51. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes. — A penalty

lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a felony.

Art. 52. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in consummated crime.

— The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated crime shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the
commission of a consummated felony.

Art. 53. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a

consummated felony. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the
accessories to the commission of a consummated felony.

Art. 54. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated crime. —

The penalty next lower in degree than prescribed by law for the frustrated
felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a
frustrated felony.

69
Art. 55. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated crime. —
The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the commission
of a frustrated felony.

Art. 56. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted crime. —

The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for an attempt
to commit a felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in an attempt to
commit the felony.

Art. 57. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted crime. —

The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
attempted felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to
commit a felony.

Application of Article 50 to 57

Participation Consummated Frustrated Attempted

Principal Penalty imposed by law 1° less 2° less
Accomplice 1° less 2° less 3° less
Accessory 2° less 3° less 4° less
• Notes:
Art 50-57 not applicable when the law specifically prescribes the penalty for the
frustrated and attempted felony or that to be imposed upon the accomplices and
accessories.

Degree – one whole penalty, one entire penalty or one unit of the penalties
enumerated in the graduated scales provided for in Art 71

Period – one of 3 equal portions, min/med/max of a divisible penalty. A period of a

divisible penalty when prescribed by the Code as a penalty for a felony, is in itself a
degree.
Distinctions between Degree and Period
Degree Period
Refers to the penalty imposable for a felony Refers to the duration of the penalty consisting
committed considering the stages of execution of the maximum, medium, and minimum, after
and the degree of participation of the offender considering the presence or absence of
aggravating / mitigating circumstances
May refer to both divisible and indivisible Refers only to divisible penalties
penalties
• The rules provided in Arts. 53, 55 and 57 do not apply if the felony is light because
accessories are not liable for the same

• Bases for imposition of the penalty under the RPC

a. Stage of the commission of the crime

1. Participation of the persons liable

2. Presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances

In making any reduction by one or more degrees, the basis used in the penalty already prescribed,
not as already reduced.

70
Art. 58. Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories. —
Those accessories falling within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of
this Code who should act with abuse of their public functions, shall suffer
the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal
offender shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of absolute temporary
disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave felony.

• Art.58 is limited only to grave and less grave felonies since it is not possible to have
accessories liable for light felonies. It is further limited to those whose participation in
the crime is characterized by the misuse of public office or authority.

Example: a) A mayor aided in friend, a wanted criminal, in escaping

b) A senator gives protection to his jueteng lord friend

• Additional Penalties for Public Officers who are accessories

1. Absolute perpetual disqualification, if the principal offender is guilty of a grave
felony.

2. Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal offender is guilty of less grave

felony

Art. 59. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the
means employed or the aims sought are impossible. — When the person
intending to commit an offense has already performed the acts for the
execution of the same but nevertheless the crime was not produced by
reason of the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of impossible
accomplishment or because the means employed by such person are
essentially inadequate to produce the result desired by him, the court,
having in mind the social danger and the degree of criminality shown by the
offender, shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from
200 to 500 pesos.

• Basis for the imposition of proper penalty in impossible crimes: social danger
and degree of criminality shown by the offender.

Example: Juan fired a revolver at Pedro at the distance of 2 kilometers. This shows
stupidity rather than danger. Juan should not be punished as there is no social danger
nor degree of criminality.
But if Juan was a convicted felon, act may be punished.

• Article limited to those cases of grave and less grave felonies.

Art. 60. Exception to the rules established in Articles 50 to 57. — The provisions
contained in Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code shall not be applicable
to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a
frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or
accessories.

• 2 cases wherein the accomplice is punished w/ the same penalty imposed

upon the principal
a) ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and any person who by abuse of
authority or confidential relationship shall cooperate as accomplices in the crimes
of rape, acts of lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of minors, white slave trade
or abduction.

71
 b) one who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of slight illegal
detention.

• Accessory punished as principal: Art 142 – punishes an accessory for knowingly

concealed certain evil practices.

• Cases when instead of a penalty 2 degrees lower, one degree for accessory:
a) knowingly using counterfeited seal or forged signature or stamp of the President

b) illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank note

c) using a falsified document

d) using a falsified dispatch

Art. 61. Rules for graduating penalties. — For the purpose of graduating the
penalties which, according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57, inclusive,
of this Code, are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any
frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories, the
following rules shall be observed:

1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and indivisible,
the penalty next lower in degrees shall be that immediately following that
indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71
of this Code.

2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of two

indivisible penalties, or of one or more divisible penalties to be impose to
their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately
following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated
scale.

3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or two
indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty,
the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and
minimum periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum periods
of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately
following in said respective graduated scale.

4. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several

periods, corresponding to different divisible penalties, the penalty next
lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the
minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which shall be taken from
the penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately
following in the above mentioned respective graduated scale.

5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not
especially provided for in the four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding
by analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as
principals of the frustrated felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and
upon accomplices and accessories.

• The rules provided in this Art should also apply in determining the minimum of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL). It also applies in lowering the penalty by one or
two degrees by reason of the presence of the privileged mitigating circumstance or
when the penalty is divisible and there are two or more mitigating circumstances.

72
Graduated Scale in Art 71
• Indivisible Penalties:
a) Death
b) Reclusion Perpetua

• Divisible Penalties:
a) Reclusion Temporal
b) Prision Mayor
c) Prision Correccional
d) Arresto Mayor
e) Destierro
f) Arresto Menor
g) Public Censure
h) Fine

• Rule No. 1:
When the penalty is single and indivisible (ex. RP), the penalty next lower shall be
reclusion temporal.

• Rule No. 2:
a) when the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties
Ex. penalty for parricide is reclusion perpetua to death, the next lower penalty is
reclusion temporal

b) when the penalty is composed of one or more divisible penalties to be imposed to

their full extent
Ex. 1) one divisible penalty is reclusion temporal. The penalty immediately
following RT is prision mayor.
2) 2 divisible penalties are prision correccional to prision mayor. The penalty
immediately preceding the lesser of the penalties of prision correccional to prision
mayor is arresto mayor.

• Rule No. 3:
When the penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties and the maximum period of a
divisible penalty or when composed of one divisible penalty the maximum of one
divisible penalty
Ex. penalty for murder is reclusion temporal(max) to death. The point of reference
will be on the proper divisible penalty which is reclusion temporal. Under the 3 rd
rule, the penalty next lower to reclusion temporal is composed of the medium and
minimum periods of reclusion temporal and the maximum of prision mayor.

• Rule No.4:
When the penalty is composed of several periods
Ex. the “several” periods contemplated in this rule correspond to different divisible
penalties. A penalty of prision mayor in its medium period to reclusion temporal in
its minimum period is an example of such. The penalty immediately following the
minimum of the entire sentence, which is prision mayor medium, is prision mayor
in its minimum and the 2 periods next following, which are prision correccional max
and medium.

• Rule No.5:
When the penalty has only 2 periods
Ex. Abduction punishable by prision correccional in its medium and minimum. The
next penalty following is formed by 2 periods to be taken from the same penalty if
possible or from the periods of the penalty numerically following the lesser of the
penalties prescribed. The penalty next following prision correccional in its med and
min shall be arresto mayor in its med and max.

73
• Mitigating and Aggravating circumstances are first disregarded in the application of
the rules for graduating penalties. It is only after the penalty next lower in degree is
already determined that the mitigating and aggravating circumstances should be
considered.

Art. 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances and

of habitual delinquency. — Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and
habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for the purpose of
diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules:

1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime

specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in
defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be
taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty.

1.(a) When in the commission of the crime, advantage was taken by the
offender of his public position, the penalty to be imposed shall be in its
maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances.

The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any
person 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.

2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating

circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of
necessity accompany the commission thereof.

3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral

attributes of the offender, or from his private relations with the
offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and
accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant.

4. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act,

or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or
mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them
at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.

5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects.

(a) Upon a third conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty
provided by law for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the
additional penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods;

(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty
provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods; and

(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to

the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the

74
additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion
temporal in its minimum period.

Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the two penalties
to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case
exceed 30 years.

For the purpose of this article, a person shall be deemed to be habitual

delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo,
hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third
time or oftener. (As amended by Section 23 of R.A. no. 7659)

• Par 1: Aggravating circumstances are not to be taken into account when:

a) they themselves constitute a crime
Ex. by “means of fire” – arson
b) they are included by law in the definition of a crime

Example: the aggravating circumstances of trespass or “escalamiento” is in itself a crime (Art.

280). The breaking of a roof, floor or window may constitute malicious mischief. The burning of
anything of value may constitute arson. These aggravating circumstances, if considered as
felonies, do not increase the penalty.

Among the aggravating circumstances included in the definition of a crime are taking
advantage of public position in estafa under Art. 214, abuse of confidence in qualified theft (Art.
310); the circumstances which qualify homicide in murder (Art. 248); and the use of artifice
involving great waste and ruin in the crimes punished in Arts. 324 and 330.

• Par 2: Same rules applies when the aggravating circumstance is inherent in the crime

Example: Relationship is inherent in the crimes of parricide and infanticide; abuse of confidence
is inherent in malversation, qualified theft, seduction and estafa; sex is inherent in crimes against
chastity; taking advantage of public position, in crimes committed by public officers;
premeditation is inherent in robbery, theft, estafa and similar offenses. Nocturnity, abuse of
superiority and craft are absorbed by treachery and are therefore inherent in murder qualified by
treachery. Premeditation, abuse of superiority and treachery are inherent in treason.

• Par 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances arising from any of the ff affect only
those to whom such circumstances are attendant: a) from the moral attributes of the
offender
b) from his private relations w/ the offended party
c) from any other personal cause

Example: Four malefactors commit homicide. One of them is under 18. Another is drunk.
The third is a recidivist, and the fourth is neither under age, nor drunk, nor a recidivist. The first
has in his favor the mitigating circumstances of minority which does not affect his co-defendants.
The second has a different circumstances in his favor, drunkenness, which does not extend to the
other participants in the crime. The third has an aggravating circumstance which affects him only.
The fourth shall suffer the penalty corresponding to him without taking into consideration the
aggravating circumstances affecting one or the extenuating circumstances affecting the others.

Rule 3 is illustrated in the crime of parricide wherein a stranger had participated. He is

guilty of homicide or murder and not parricide. In the same manner, the stranger who participated
in the commission of qualified theft involving abuse of confidence and who had no confidential
relationship with the victim is only guilty of simple theft. But the rule is different in malversation.
A private individual coordinating with the accountable public officer in committing malversation
is a co-principal in the crime.

75
 In homicide, relationship aggravates the liability of the relative, who is a co-principal, but
not of the other principals who are not related to the victim. Lack of instruction is mitigating as to
the principal, who is actually illiterate, but not with respect to the other principals who have
educational attainment.

However, in adultery, the privileged mitigating circumstance of abandonment would

benefit both offenders, even if it was only the offending wife who was abandoned.( Pp vs. Avelino
)

• Par 4: the circumstances w/c consist of the ff shall serve to aggravate and mitigate the
liability only of those who had knowledge of them at the time of the commission of the
offense
a) material execution of the act
b) means employed to accomplish the crime

Groizard says that the circumstances attending the commission of a crime either relate to
the persons participating in the same or to its material execution, or to the means employed. The
former do not affect all the participants in the crime, but only to those whom, they particularly
apply; the latter have direct bearing upon the criminal liability of all defendants who had
knowledge thereof at the time of the commission of the crime, or of their cooperation therein.

Example: A and B killed C. In the execution of the act of killing, A disguised himself in
peace officer which was not made known to B. The aggravating circumstance of disguising as a
peace officer shall be appreciated only against A, who employed the same in the killing of C. It is
only logical that A should be made to suffer a more serious penalty, as the idea is to affect only
those who have knowledge of it at the time of the execution of the act.

In the crime of murder, A hired B to kill C, to prevent the latter from being a candidate for
mayor in the May 11, 1998 elections. In the actual killing of C, deliberately augmented the
suffering of C chopping him into pieces and scattering his remains in several places. The
aggravating circumstances of cruelty and outraging or scoffing at the person or corpse of C should
be appreciated only against B.

Example: A, B and C agreed to kill X so armed with guns, they proceeded to the house of
the latter whereupon A told B and C that he would stay in the yard to prevent any relative of X
from helping the victim. When B and C entered the room of X, and saw him sleeping, it was C who
shot him. The treachery that attended the commission of the crime shall also affect B and not only
C who treacherously killed X in his sleep because B had knowledge of the treacherous act being
present actually during the shooting. A’s liability is not aggravated by treachery as he had no
knowledge of it, being in the yard.

Cases where the attending aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not

considered in the imposition of penalties.
• Penalty that is single and indivisible

• Felonies through negligence

• Penalty is a fine

• Penalty is prescribed by a special law

• Par 5: Habitual Delinquent is a person who within the period of 10 years from the
date of his (last) release or last conviction of the crimes of: a) serious or less serious
physical injuries
b) robbery
c) theft
d) estafa
e) falsification is found guilty of any of the said crimes a third time or oftener.

• Ten year period to be computed from the time of last release or conviction

76
• Subsequent crime must be committed after conviction of the former crime. Cases still
pending are not to be taken into consideration.
HABITUAL DELINQUENCY RECIDIVISM
Crimes to be committed are specified Same title
W/ in 10 years No time fixed by law
rd
Must be found guilty 3 time or oftener Second conviction
Additional penalty is imposed Is not offset by MC, increases penalty to
maximum
Habitual delinquency is not a crime. It is a circumstance that will authorize the court to
add an additional penalty for the present crime committed. It is only a factor in determining the
total penalty to be imposed upon the offender.

Habitual delinquency imposes an additional penalty, however, if the same is imposed

after the court has acquired jurisdiction over the crime, and the total penalty would exceed the
jurisdictional limit of the court, such situation will not divest the court of its jurisdiction over the
crime. (Pp vs.
Blanco, 86 Phil. 296)

In order that habitual delinquency may be appreciated against the accused, it must be
alleged and detailed in the information or complaint. The dates of the commission of the previous
crimes; the last conviction of release must be contained or written in the information.

Under Article 22, when one is a habitual delinquent and he commits felony or offense,
any future punitive law that may favor him in relation to the punishment imposed on him, will not
be given a retroactive effect insofar as said offender is concerned.

He is not also entitled to the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Example:
CRIMES COMMITTED DATE OF CONVICTION DATE OF RELEASE
Serious Physical Injury January, 1960 January, 1973
Theft February, 1968 February, 1975
Robbery March, 1980

In the example mentioned above, as regards the conviction for theft in February, 1968
the starting point for the computation of the ten-year period is the date of conviction for serious
physical injuries in January, 1960 because that is the last conviction with respect to the second
conviction for theft in February, 1968. The date of release is not considered anymore because the
conviction for theft took place within ten years from the last conviction for serious physical
injuries. We ignore the date of release because it came after the conviction.

With respect to the third conviction for robbery in March 1980, the tenyear period is to
be computed not from the date of last conviction for theft in February, 1968 because that would
be beyond the period provided by law, but from the date of release of the accused in February,
1975, as the law provides for the computation of the ten-year period in the alternative, either
from the last conviction or release. Apparently, in the example given, the last or third conviction
is more than ten years from 1968, but within ten years from release. The period of ten years is
therefore satisfied. The offender in the example given is a habitual delinquent.

• Rulings on Habitual Delinquency:

a) the law on habitual delinquency does not contemplate the exclusion from the
computation of prior conviction those falling outside the 10 yr period immediately
preceding the crime for w/c the defendant is being tried

b) ten yr period is counted not from the date of commission of the subsequent offense
but to the date of conviction thereof in relation to the date of his last release or last
conviction

77
 c) when an offender has committed several crimes mentioned in the definition of
habitual delinquent, without being first convicted of any of them before committing
the others, he is not a habitual delinquent

d) convictions on the same day or at about the same time are considered as one only
(days, weeks..)

e) crimes committed on the same date, although convictions on different dates are
considered as one

f) previous convictions are considered every time a new offense is committed

g) commissions of those crimes need not be consummated

h) habitual delinquency applies to accomplice and accessories as long it is in the

crimes specified

i) a crime committed in the minority of the offender is not counted

j) imposition of additional penalty is mandatory and constitutional

k) modifying circumstances applicable to additional penalty

l) habitual delinquency is not a crime, it is simply a fact or circumstance which if

present gives rise to the imposition of additional penalty

m) penalty for habitual delinquency is a real penalty that determines jurisdiction

n) in imposing the additional penalty, recidivism is not aggravating. The additional

penalty must be imposed in its minimum

o) an offender can be a habitual delinquent w/o being a recidivist

Notes:
• In no case shall be the total penalties imposed upon the offender exceed 30 years

• The law does not apply to crimes described in Art. 155(alarms and scandals)

• The imposition of the additional penalties on habitual delinquents are constitutional, it

is simply a punishment on future crimes on account of the criminal propensities of the
accused.

• Habitual delinquency applies at any stage of the execution because subjectively, the
offender reveals the same degree of depravity or perversity as the one who commits
a consummated crime.
• Habitual delinquency applies to all participants because it reveals persistence in them
of the inclination to wrongdoing and of the perversity of character that led them to
commit the previous crime.

Note: There is no habitual delinquency in offenses punished by special laws. Courts

cannot also take judicial notice of the previous convictions of the accused. Facts of previous
convictions must be established during the trial of the accused.

Art. 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. — In all cases in which
the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by the
courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may
have attended the commission of the deed.

78
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible
penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof:

1. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one

aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be applied.

2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances in

the commission of the deed, the lesser penalty shall be applied.

3. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating

circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty
shall be applied.

4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the

commission of the act, the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one
another in consideration of their number and importance, for the purpose of
applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules, according to
the result of such compensation.

• Art 63 applies only when the penalty prescribed by the Code is either one indivisible
penalty or 2 indivisible penalties

Article 63 must be understood to mean and to refer only to ordinary mitigating circumstances. It
does not refer to privileged mitigating circumstances.

• General rule: When the penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties, the penalty
cannot be lowered by one degree no matter how many mitigating circumstances are
present
Exception: in cases of privileged mitigating circumstances

• Par.4: the moral value rather than the numerical weight shall be taken into account

• Rules for the application of indivisible penalties

Penalty is single and indivisible – applied regardless of the presence of aggravating
and mitigating circumstances

Penalty composed of two indivisible penalties

1. One aggravating circumstance present – higher penalty

2. One mitigating circumstance present – lower penalty

3. Some mitigating circumstances present and no aggravating – lower penalty

4. Mitigating and Aggravating Circumstance are present – basis in number and

importance

Art. 64. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. — In
cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods,
whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different
penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance with the
provisions of Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the application
of the penalty the following rules, according to whether there are or are not
mitigating or aggravating circumstances:

1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances,

they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.

79
2. When only a mitigating circumstance is present in the commission of
the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period.

3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of

the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period.

4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the

court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according
to their relative weight.

5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no

aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty
next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem
applicable, according to the number and nature of such circumstances.

6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating

circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that
prescribed by law, in its maximum period.

7. Within the limits of each period, the court shall determine the extent
of the penalty according to the number and nature of the aggravating and
mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser extent of the evil
produced by the crime.

• Art 64 applies when the penalty has 3 periods because they are divisible. If the penalty
is composed of 3 different penalties, each forms a period according to Art 77

• Par 4: the mitigating circumstances must be ordinary, not privileged. The aggravating
circumstances must be generic or specific, not qualifying or inherent.

Example: a qualifying circumstance (treachery) cannot be offset by a generic

mitigating circumstance (voluntary circumstance)

• The court has discretion to impose the penalty within the limits fixed by law

• Art 64 not applicable when the penalty is indivisible or prescribed by special law or a
fine

• Rules for the application of divisible penalties

No aggravating and no mitigating circumstances – medium period

One mitigating circumstance – minimum period

One aggravating circumstance – maximum period

Mitigating and aggravating circumstance offset each other and according to

relative weight

2 or more mitigating without any aggravating circumstance – on degree lower

If in the commission of the crime, one aggravating circumstance is present, and four
mitigating circumstances are likewise left, the offsetting of one aggravating circumstance will not
entitle the accused to a reduction of his penalty by one degree. You will only lower the penalty by
one degree if it is divisible and there is absolutely no aggravating circumstance.

Penalty for murder under the Revised Penal Code is reclusion temporal maximum to death. So,
the penalty would be reclusion temporal maximum – reclusion perpetua – death. This penalty
made up of three periods.

80
Art. 65. Rule in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods. — In
cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of three
periods, the courts shall apply the rules contained in the foregoing articles,
dividing into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed,
and forming one period of each of the three portions.

COMPUTATIONS:

A. Example: Prision Mayor (6 yrs, 1 day to 12 yrs)

1) subtract the minimum (disregard 1 day) from the maximum
12yrs – 6yrs = 6 yrs
2) divide the difference by 3
6 yrs / 3 = 2 yrs
3) use the minimum (6 yrs and 1 day) as the minimum of the minimum period. Then
add the 2 yrs (disregarding the 1 day) to the minimum to get the maximum of the
minimum
6 yrs (minimum of the minimum)
+ 2 yrs (difference)
-------------------------------------------
8 yrs (maximum of the minimum).
Therefore, minimum period of prision mayor; 6 yrs 1 day to 8 yrs

4) use the maximum of the minimum period as the minimum of the medium period
and add 1 day to distinguish from the minimum period. Then add 2 years to the
minimum of the medium (disregarding the 1 day) to get the maximum of the
medium period.
8 yrs (minimum of the medium)
+ 2 yrs (difference)
-------------------------------------------
10 yrs (maximum of the medium)

Therefore, medium period of prision mayor; 8 yrs 1 day to 10 yrs

5) use the maximum of the medium period as the minimum of the maximum pd,
add 1 day to distinguish it from the medium period. Then add 2 yrs to the
minimum of the maximum pd (disregarding the 1 day) to get the maximum of the
maximum period)
10 yrs (maximum of the medium)
+ 2 yrs (difference)
----------------------------------------------
12 yrs (maximum of the maximum)
Therefore, maximum period of prision mayor; 10 yrs 1 day to 12 yrs

Computation above applicable to all others except arresto mayor

B. Example: Prision Mayor minimum (6 yrs 1 day to 8 yrs) only
1) Subtract minimum from the maximum
8yrs – 6yrs = 2 yrs
2) Divide the difference by 3
2yrs / 3 = 8 months
3) Use the minimum of the given example as the minimum period. Then to get to
get the maximum of the minimum, add the 8 months
6 yrs + 8 months = 6 yrs and 8 months
Therefore, minimum of prision mayor minimum; 6 yrs 1 day to 6 yrs 8 months

4) Use the maximum of the minimum as the minimum of the medium period. Add
1 day to distinguish it from the maximum of the minimum. Add the 8 months and
this becomes the maximum of the medium
6 yrs 8 months + 8 months = 7 yrs 4 months
Therefore, the medium period of prision mayor minimum; 6 yrs 8 mos 1 day to 7 yrs 4 mos

81
5) Use the maximum of the medium as the minimum period of the maximum period
and add 1 day to distinguish. Add the 8 months to get the maximum of this
maximum
7 yrs 4 mos + 8 mos = 8 yrs
Therefore, maximum of prision mayor; 7 yrs 4 mos 1 day to 8 yrs

Act No. 4013 (INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW), as amended

Three things to know about the Indeterminate Sentence Law:

(1) Its purpose;

(2) Instances when it does not apply; and

(3) How it operates

Indeterminate Sentence Law governs whether the crime is punishable under the Revised Penal
Code or a special Law. It is not limited to violations of the Revised Penal Code.

It applies only when the penalty served is imprisonment. If not by imprisonment, then it does not
apply.

Purpose

The purpose of the Indeterminate Sentence law is to avoid prolonged imprisonment, because it is
proven to be more destructive than constructive to the offender. So, the purpose of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law in shortening the possible detention of the convict in jail is to save
valuable human resources. In other words, if the valuable human resources were allowed
prolonged confinement in jail, they would deteriorate. Purpose is to preserve economic usefulness
for these people for having committed a crime -- to reform them rather than to deteriorate them
and, at the same time, saving the government expenses of maintaining the convicts on a prolonged
confinement in jail.

If the crime is a violation of the Revised Penal Code, the court will impose a sentence that has a
minimum and maximum. The maximum of the indeterminate sentence will be arrived at by
taking into account the attendant mitigating and/or aggravating circumstances according to Article
64 of the Revised Penal Code. In arriving at the minimum of the indeterminate sentence, the
court will take into account the penalty prescribed for the crime and go one degree lower. Within
the range of one degree lower, the court will fix the minimum for the indeterminate sentence, and
within the range of the penalty arrived at as the maximum in the indeterminate sentence, the court
will fix the maximum of the sentence. If there is a privilege mitigating circumstance which has
been taken in consideration in fixing the maximum of the indeterminate sentence, the minimum
shall be based on the penalty as reduced by the privilege mitigating circumstance within the range
of the penalty next lower in degree.

If the crime is a violation of a special law, in fixing the maximum of the indeterminate sentence,
the court will impose the penalty within the range of the penalty prescribed by the special law, as
long as it will not exceed the limit of the penalty. In fixing the minimum, the court can fix a penalty
anywhere within the range of penalty prescribed by the special law, as long as it will not be less
than the minimum limit of the penalty under said law. No mitigating and aggravating circumstances
are taken into account.

The minimum and the maximum referred to in the Indeterminate Sentence Law are not periods.
So, do not say, maximum or minimum period. For the purposes of the indeterminate Sentence
Law, use the term minimum to refer to the duration of the sentence which the convict shall serve
as a minimum, and when we say maximum, for purposes of ISLAW, we refer to the maximum limit
of the duration that the convict may be held in jail. We are not referring to any period of the penalty
as enumerated in Article 71.

Courts are required to fix a minimum and a maximum of the sentence that they are to impose upon
an offender when found guilty of the crime charged. So, whenever the Indeterminate Sentence
Law is applicable, there is always a minimum and maximum of the sentence that the convict shall
serve. If the crime is punished by the Revised Penal Code, the law provides that the maximum
shall be arrived at by considering the mitigating and aggravating circumstances in the commission

82
of the crime according to the proper rules of the Revised Penal Code. To fix the maximum, consider
the mitigating and aggravating circumstances according to the rules found in Article 64. This means
–

(1) Penalties prescribed by the law for the crime committed shall be imposed in the medium
period if no mitigating or aggravating circumstance;

(2) If there is aggravating circumstance, no mitigating, penalty shall be imposed in the

maximum;

(3) If there is mitigating circumstance, no aggravating, penalty shall be in the minimum;

(4) If there are several mitigating and aggravating circumstances, they shall offset against
each other. Whatever remains, apply the rules.

(5) If there are two or more mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance, penalty
next lower in degree shall be the one imposed.

Rule under Art 64 shall apply in determining the maximum but not in determining the minimum.

In determining the applicable penalty according to the Indeterminate Sentence Law, there is no
need to mention the number of years, months and days; it is enough that the name of the penalty
is mentioned while the Indeterminate Sentence Law is applied. To fix the minimum and the
maximum of the sentence, penalty under the Revised Penal Code is not the penalty to be imposed
by court because the court must apply the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The attendant mitigating
and/or aggravating circumstances in the commission of the crime are taken into consideration only
when the maximum of the penalty is to be fixed. But in so far as the minimum is concerned, the
basis of the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code, and go one degree lower than that.
But penalty one degree lower shall be applied in the same manner that the maximum is also fixed
based only on ordinary mitigating circumstances. This is true only if the mitigating circumstance
taken into account is only an ordinary mitigating circumstance. If the mitigating circumstance is
privileged, you cannot follow the law in so far as fixing the minimum of the indeterminate sentence
is concerned; otherwise, it may happen that the maximum of the indeterminate sentence is lower
than its minimum.

In one Supreme Court ruling, it was held that for purposes of applying the Indeterminate
Sentence Law, the penalty prescribed by the Revised Penal Code and not that which may be
imposed by court. This ruling, however, is obviously erroneous. This is so because such an
interpretation runs contrary to the rule of pro reo, which provides that the penal laws should always
be construed an applied in a manner liberal or lenient to the offender. Therefore, the rule is, in
applying the Indetermiante Sentence Law, it is that penalty arrived at by the court after applying
the mitigating and aggravating circumstances that should be the basis.

Crimes punished under special law carry only one penalty; there are no degree or periods.
Moreover, crimes under special law do not consider mitigating or aggravating circumstance present
in the commission of the crime. So in the case of statutory offense, no mitigating and no
aggravating circumstances will be taken into account. Just the same, courts are required in
imposing the penalty upon the offender to fix a minimum that the convict should serve, and to set
a maximum as the limit of that sentence. Under the law, when the crime is punished under a
special law, the court may fix any penalty as the maximum without exceeding the penalty prescribed
by special law for the crime committed. In the same manner, courts are given discretion to fix a
minimum anywhere within the range of the penalty prescribed by special law, as long as it will not
be lower than the penalty prescribed.

Disqualification may be divided into three, according to –

(1) The time committed;

(2) The penalty imposed; and

(3) The offender involved.

The Indeterminate Sentence Law shall not apply to:

(1) Persons convicted of offense punishable with death penalty or life imprisonment;

(2) Persons convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason;

83
(3) Persons convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition, espionage;

(4) Persons convicted of piracy;

(5) Persons who are habitual delinquents;

(6) Persons who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence;

(7) Those who have been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive and shall have
violated the term thereto;

(8) Those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year( consider the
maximum term not the minimum term), but not to those already sentenced by final
judgment at the time of the approval of Indeterminate Sentence Law.

(9) Those sentenced to destiero or suspension( this are not punishable by imprisonment ).

Although the penalty prescribed for the felony committed is death or reclusion perpetua, if after
considering the attendant circumstances, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal or less, the
Indeterminate Sentence Law applies (People v. Cempron, 187 SCRA 278).

Recidivists entitled to the availment of the Indeterminate Sentence Law since those
disqualified are Habitula delinquents. (People vs. Venus, 63 Phil.
435)

When the accused escaped from jail while his case was on appeal, he is not entitled to
the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. (People vs.
Martinado, 214 SCRA 712)

A youthful offender whose sentence is suspended under Sec. 192 of P.D. 603 and who
escaped from his confinement is still entitled to the application of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law. The same is true with an accused confined in the National Center for Mental Health (formerly
National Mental Hospital) since their confinement cannot be considered punishment but more of
administrative matters for their rehabilitation. (People vs. Soler, 63 Phil. 868)

A person sentenced to destierro who entered the prohibited area within the prohibited
period has evaded the service of his sentence (People vs. Abilog, 82 Phil. 174) and when he
committed a crime in that area, he will not be entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate
Sentence Law for the new crime.

* ISL should not be applied when it is unfavorable to the accused.

* ISL does not apply to non-divisible penalties.

Reason for the ISL max and min: so that the prisoner could be released on parole after serving
the minimum sentence and could be rearrested to serve the maximum.

Illustrations:
1. No mitigating, aggravating, or the circumstances were offset

Example: crime is punishable by reclusion temporal (homicide)

ISL max – RT medium
ISL min – PM any period (discretion of the judge)

2. One mitigating
ISL max – RT minimum
ISL min – PM any period (discretion of the judge)

*** The mitigating circumstance shall be considered only in the imposition of the maximum
term of the sentence

3. One aggravating

84
 ISL max – RT maximum
ISL min – PM, any period

4. Two mitigating, one aggravating

ISL max – RT minimum because after offsetting one mitigating and one aggravating, only
one mitigating will be left. ISL min – PM, any period

5. Complex crime

Example: homicide with assault

Homicide – RT
Assault – PC

*** Remember that complex crimes are punishable by the more severe penalty of the two crimes
to imposed in its max period. Therefore,
ISL max – RT max
ISL min – PM, any period

Example: frustrated homicide with assault (being frustrated, one degree lower)
ISL max – PM max
ISL min - PC, any period

6. Art. 282 says that the crime of grave threats is punishable by a penalty lower by two
degrees than that prescribed by law for the crime threatened.

Example: A threatened to kill B. Homicide is punishable by RT. Since A is liable only for threats
of homicide, he shall be punished by prision correctional. If there is an aggravating
circumstance (relationship of A to B, for example) then the maximum period shall attach to
the penalty (PC) only after lowering by 2 degrees.

ISL max – PC max (with aggravating)

ILS min – AM any period

7. Complex crime with two mitigating, no aggravating

For purposes of ISL, the penalty next lower should be determined without due regard as to
whether the basic penalty provided by the Code should be applied in its max or min period as
circumstances modifying liability may require. However (as an exemption), whether the
number of the mitigating is such as to entitle the accused to the penalty next lower in degree,
this penalty in the ISL should be starting point for the determination of the next lower in
degree (ISL min). For instance, if the more serious offense in the complex crime is punishable
by prision mayor, the whole of prision mayor should be considered for the purposes of
determining the penalty next lower in degree – NOT prision mayor max which is the usual
rule.

So now, we lower it by one degree because of the two mitigating – the ISL max will be PC max
(max because it’s a complex crime). ISL min will be AM any period.

8. A privileged mitigating and an ordinary mitigating

When there is a privileged mitigating (minority or incomplete self-defense) and an ordinary

mitigating (plea of guilty or voluntary surrender), the rule is: Lower first the penalty prescribed
by the Code by one degree (because of the privileged mitigating). This will be the max of the
ISL and the penalty next lower will be the minimum of the ISL.

Example: A, a minor, pleaded guilty to murder. Murder is punishable by RT max to death.

*** There being a privileged mitigating circumstance of minority, the penalty should be one
degree lower.

85
*** There is also an ordinary mitigating circumstance (plea of guilty), so the lowered penalty
will be imposed in its minimum period which is PM max
ISL max – PM max
ISL min – any period between PC max to PM med

9. Two privileged mitigating and ordinary mitigating circumstance

Example: A, a minor, killed B in self-defense but A did not employ reasonable means. A
surrendered to the authorities. The penalty of homicide is RT.

ISL max – PC min

There are 2 privileged mitigating namely minority and incomplete self-defense so RT
should be lowered by 2 degrees (PC). It should likewise be imposed in the minimum because
of the ordinary mitigating of voluntary surrender. ISL min – AM any period

10.Incomplete defense, no mitigating, no aggravating

To determine the ISL max

Unlawful aggression only - ordinary mitigating
Unlawful aggression plus one other requisite – 1 degree lower
ISL min – penalty next lower to the above

11.Incomplete self-defense, plus 2 ordinary mitigating, no aggravating

Example: A killed B in self-defense. But means used was not reasonable. However, there were
2 ordinary mitigating: A acted with obfuscation and he surrendered

The penalty for homicide is RT, RT should be lowered by 1 degree for incomplete self-defense
(unlawful aggression and no provocation from A), making it prision mayor. This should be
further reduced by one degree because of 2 ordinary mitigating without any aggravating,
making it PC.

ISL max – PC med

ISL min – AM any period

12.Murder with 2 or more mitigating, no aggravating

Code punishes murder with RT max to death. If for instance, there was voluntary surrender
and plea of guilty, the penalty should be lowered by one degree, there being 2 mitigating.
One degree lower to DM max to RT medium (refer to scale in No.8).

This should be subdivided into 3 periods. The ISL max would be then the medium period of
PM max to RT med which is 12 yrs, 5 mos, 11 days to 14 yrs, 10 mos, 20 days. The ISL min
would be anywhere within PC max to PM medium (refer to scale)

13.Robbery in uninhabited house

This crime is punishable by RT. If the offender is not armed and the stolen thing is less than
250 pesos, it should be lowered by one degree which is PM in its minimum period. The penalty
is to be imposed in the medium period, there no aggravating nor mitigating. The ISL max
should then be to the PM min.

If under special law

- no modifying circumstance is taken into account unless specially provided for by the law
- the basis of the application of the ISL is the “penalty actually imposed” and not that
imposable by law

86
 Presidential Decree No. 968 (PROBATION LAW)
Probation is a manner of disposing of an accused who have been convicted by a trial court by
placing him under supervision of a probation officer, under such terms and conditions that the court
may fix. This may be availed of before the convict begins serving sentence by final judgment and
provided that he did not appeal anymore from conviction.

The ff. are disqualified:

1. those sentenced to a max of term of imprisonment of more than 6 years

2. those convicted of subversion or any crime against national security or public order

3. those who were previously convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by

imprisonment of not less than 1 month and 1 day and/or fine of not more than 200

4. those who have been once on probation

5. those already serving sentence

Without regard to the nature of the crime, only those whose penalty does not exceed six years of
imprisonment are those qualified for probation. If the penalty is six years plus one day, he is no
longer qualified for probation.

If the offender was convicted of several offenses which were tried jointly and one decision was
rendered where multiple sentences imposed several prison terms as penalty, the basis for
determining whether the penalty disqualifies the offender from probation or not is the term of the
individual imprisonment and not the totality of all the prison terms imposed in the decision. So
even if the prison term would sum up to more than six years, if none of the individual penalties
exceeds six years, the offender is not disqualified by such penalty from applying for probation.

On the other hand, without regard to the penalty, those who are convicted of subversion or any
crime against the public order are not qualified for probation. So know the crimes under Title III,
Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code. Among these crimes is Alarms and Scandals, the penalty of
which is only arresto menor or a fine. Under the amendment to the Probation Law, those convicted
of a crime against public order regardless of the penalty are not qualified for probation. May a
recidivist be given the benefit of Probation Law?

As a general rule, NO

Exception: If the earlier conviction refers to a crime the penalty of which does not exceed 30 days
imprisonment or a fine of not more than P200.00 (Arresto Menor), such convict is not disqualified
of the benefit of probation. So even if he would be convicted subsequently of a crime embraced in
the same title of the Revised Penal Code as that of the earlier conviction, he is not disqualified from
probation provided that the penalty of the current crime committed does not go beyond six years
and the nature of the crime committed by him is not against public order, national security or
subversion.

Although a person may be eligible for probation, the moment he perfects an appeal from the
judgment of conviction, he cannot avail of probation anymore. So the benefit of probation must be
invoked at the earliest instance after conviction. He should not wait up to the time when he
interposes an appeal or the sentence has become final and executory. The idea is that probation
has to be invoked at the earliest opportunity.

An application for probation is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the trial court that renders the
judgment. For the offender to apply in such court, he should not appeal such judgment.

Once he appeals, regardless of the purpose of the appeal, he will be disqualified from applying for
Probation, even though he may thereafter withdraw his appeal.

If the offender would appeal the conviction of the trial court and the appellate court reduced the
penalty to say, less than six years, that convict can still file an application for probation, because
the earliest opportunity for him to avail of probation came only after judgment by the appellate
court.

87
Whether a convict who is otherwise qualified for probation may be given the benefit of probation or
not, the courts are always required to conduct a hearing. If the court denied the application for
probation without the benefit of the hearing, where as the applicant is not disqualified under the
provision of the Probation Law, but only based on the report of the probation officer, the denial is
correctible by certiorari, because it is an act of the court in excess of jurisdiction or without
jurisdiction, the order denying the application therefore is null and void.

Probation is intended to promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him
with individualized treatment; to provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender
which might be less probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; to prevent the commission of
offenses; to decongest our jails; and to save the government much needed finance for maintaining
convicts in jail

Probation is only a privilege. So even if the offender may not be disqualified of probation, yet the
court believes that because of the crime committed it was not advisable to give probation because
it would depreciate the effect of the crime, the court may refuse or deny an application for probation.

Generally, the courts do not grant an application for probation for violation of the Dangerous Drugs
Law, because of the prevalence of the crime. So it is not along the purpose of probation to grant
the convict the benefit thereof, just the individual rehabilitation of the offender but also the best
interest of the society and the community where the convict would be staying, if he would be
released on probation. To allow him loose may bring about a lack of respect of the members of
the community to the enforcement of penal law. In such a case, the court even if the crime is
probationable may still deny the benefit of probation.

Consider not only the probationable crime, but also the probationable penalty. If it were the
nonprobationable crime, then regardless of the penalty, the convict cannot avail of probation.
Generally, the penalty which is not probationable is any penalty exceeding six years of
imprisonment. Offenses which are not probationable are those against natural security, those
against public order and those with reference to subversion.

Persons who have been granted of the benefit of probation cannot avail thereof for the second
time. Probation is only available once and this may be availed only where the convict starts serving
sentence and provided he has not perfected an appeal. If the convict perfected an appeal, he
forfeits his right to apply for probation. As far as offenders who are under preventive imprisonment,
that because a crime committed is not bailable or the crime committed, although bailable, they
cannot afford to put up a bail, upon promulgation of the sentence, naturally he goes back to
detention, that does not mean that they already start serving the sentence even after promulgation
of the sentence, sentence will only become final and executory after the lapse of the 15-day period,
unless the convict has waived expressly his right to appeal or otherwise, he has partly started
serving sentence and in that case, the penalty will already be final and exeuctory, no right to
probation can be applied for.

Probation shall be denied if the court finds:

(1) That the offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided most
effectively by his commitment to an institution;

(2) That there is undue risk that during the period of probation the offender will commit another
crime; or

(3) Probation will depreciate the seriousness of the crime.

The probation law imposes two kinds of conditions:

(1) Mandatory conditions; and

(2) Discretionary conditions.

Mandatory conditions:

(1) The convict must report to the Probation Officer (PO) designated in the court order
approving his application for Probation within 72 hours from receipt of Notice of such order
approving his application; and

88
(2) The convict, as a probationer, must report to the PO at least once a month during the period
of probation unless sooner required by the PO.

These conditions being mandatory, the moment any of these is violate, the probation is cancelled.

Discretionary conditions:

The trial court which approved the application for probation may impose any condition which may
be constructive to the correction of the offender, provided the same would not violate the
constitutional rights of the offender and subject to this two restrictions: (1) the conditions imposed
should not be unduly restrictive of the probationer; and (2) such condition should not be
incompatible with the freedom of conscience of the probationer

Procedure of Probation:
1. trial court gives a sentence (one that qualifies you to apply for probation)

2. within the period for filing an appeal, must apply for probation in the trial court. If already
filed an appeal. As long as records haven’t reached appellate courts, must withdraw to
apply for probation. Applying for probation means waiver of RT to appeal.

3. upon application, trial court to suspend execution of sentence. But does not mean already
on probation

4. judge to order probation officer to investigate case(whether qualified, character

antecedents, environment, mental and physical condition and available institutional and
community resources) Officer to submit report not later than 60 days. Court to give
decision not later than 15 days after receipt of report. Pending investigation, may be
released under bail. No bail filed, can be released on the custody of a responsible member
of the community.

5. the judge may grant the application or not

Granted – released subject to certain conditions: Two important requirements: (1) present self to
probation officer within 72 hours from receipt of order (2) you will report to said officer at least
once a month at such time and place as specified by the officer.
Other conditions are special and discretionary and are provided in Sec. 10 of the Probation Law.
Once granted, accessory penalties are deemed suspended.

Denied – reasons of the court may be:

1. that you need correctional treatment
2. there is undue risk that you will commit another crime
3. probation may depreciate the seriousness of the offense 6. an order granting or denying

probation is NOT appealable

7. probation will last according to the ff:

a. if sentence is not more than 1 year, probation shall not exceed 2 years
b. if sentence is more than 1 year, probation shall not exceed 6 years
c. if sentence is fine with subsidiary imprisonment, probation shall be twice the days
of subsidiary

8. Probationer may be arrested at anytime during probation if there was a serious violation
of the conditions. If revoked, must serve the sentence originally imposed. Court’s order
not appealable.

9. Probation ends after the court, basing on the probation’s officer’s report, orders final
discharge. All civil rights will be restored. Pay fine for the original crime.

*** Expiration of the probation period does not automatically terminate probation. Must have
court order.

89
Art. 66. Imposition of fines. — In imposing fines the courts may fix any amount
within the limits established by law; in fixing the amount in each case
attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating
circumstances, but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit.

• Court must consider the following in imposing the fine:

a) mitigating and aggravating circumstances
b) the wealth and means of the culprit

• When the minimum of the fine is not fixed, the court shall have the discretion
provided it does not exceed the amount authorized by law

it is not only the mitigating and/or aggravating circumstances that the court shall take into
consideration, but primarily, the financial capability of the offender to pay the fine.

If the fine imposed by the law appears to be excessive, the remedy is to ask the Congress
to amend the law by reducing the fine to a reasonable amount.

Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of exemption of the
fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present.— When all the conditions
required in circumstances Number 4 of Article 12 of this Code to exempt
from criminal liability are not present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon the culprit if he shall have been guilty of a grave felony, and
arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave felony.

• Requisites of Art 12 par 4(Accident)

a) act causing the injury must be lawful

b) act performed w/ due care

c) injury was caused by mere accident

d) no fault or intention to cause injury

• if these conditions are not all present, then the ff penalties shall be imposed:
a) grave felony – arresto mayor max to prision correccional min

b) less grave felony – arresto mayor min to arresto mayor med

Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. —
When the offender is a minor under eighteen years and his case is one
coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next to the last of Article 80
of this Code, the following rules shall be observed:

1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age, who is not
exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he acted
with discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but always lower
by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he
committed.

2. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the penalty
next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the
proper period.

Notes:

90
• Art. 68 applies to such minor if his application for suspension of sentence is
disapproved or if while in the reformatory institution he becomes incorrigible in which
case he shall be returned to the court for the imposition of the proper penalty.

• Art. 68 provides for 2 privileged mitigating circumstances

under 15 but over 9 and has acted w/ discerment: 2 degrees lower

under 18 but over 15: 1 degree lower

If the act is attended by two or more mitigating circumstance and no aggravating

circumstance, the penalty being divisible a minor over 15 but under 18 may still get a
penalty two degrees lower.

Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable.
— A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law shall
be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some
of the conditions required to justify the same or to exempt from criminal
liability in the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12, provided that the
majority of such conditions be present. The courts shall impose the penalty
in the period which may be deemed proper, in view of the number and nature
of the conditions of exemption present or lacking.

• Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable

1 or 2 degrees lower if the majority of the conditions for justification or exemption
in the cases provided in Arts. 11 and 12 are present.

Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. — When the culprit has to serve two or
more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following rules shall be observed:
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity shall
be followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as may
be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or
penalties first imposed, or should they have been served out.

For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding paragraph
the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance
with the following scale:

1. Death,
2. Reclusion perpetua,
3. Reclusion temporal,
4. Prision mayor,
5. Prision correccional,
6. Arresto mayor,
7. Arresto menor,
8. Destierro,
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification, 10 Temporal absolute
disqualification.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right
to follow a profession or calling, and 12. Public censure.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum

duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the

91
length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed
upon him. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after
the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period.

Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.

In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (

penal perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years. (As amended by CA#217).

Art. 70 refers to service of sentence. It is therefore addressed to the jail warden or to the
director of prisons. The court or the judge has no power to implement Article 70 because the
provision is not for the imposition of penalties. If the penalty by their very nature can be served
simultaneously, then it must be so served.

• Maximum duration of the convict’s sentence: 3 times the most severe penalty

• Max period shall not exceed 40 years

• Subsidiary imprisonment – this shall be excluded in computing for the maximum

duration
Example: Juan has 10 sentences of 6 months and 1 day each and a fine of 1000. He
was not able to pay the fine. Therefore, he must serve subsidiary penalty after 18
months and 3 days in jail.

The Three-Fold Rule

Under this rule, when a convict is to serve successive penalties, he will not actually serve the
penalties imposed by law. Instead, the most severe of the penalties imposed on him shall be
multiplied by three and the period will be the only term of the penalty to be served by him. However,
in no case should the penalty exceed 40 years.

If the sentences would be served simultaneously, the Three-Fold rule does not govern.

Although this rule is known as the Three-Fold rule, you cannot actually apply this if the convict is to
serve only three successive penalties. The Three-Fold Rule can only be applied if the convict is to
serve four or more sentences successively.

The chronology of the penalties as provided in Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code shall be
followed.

It is in the service of the penalty, not in the imposition of the penalty, that the Three-Fold rule is to
be applied. The three-Fold rule will apply whether the sentences are the product of one information
in one court, whether the sentences are promulgated in one day or whether the sentences are
promulgated by different courts on different days. What is material is that the convict shall serve
more than three successive sentences.

For purposes of the Three-Fold Rule, even perpetual penalties are taken into account. So not only
penalties with fixed duration, even penalties without any fixed duration or indivisible penalties are
taken into account. For purposes of the Three-Fold rule, indivisible penalties are given equivalent
of 30 years. If the penalty is perpetual disqualification, it will be given and equivalent duration of
30 years, so that if he will have to suffer several perpetual disqualification, under the Three-Fold
rule, you take the most severe and multiply it by three. The Three-Fold rule does not apply to the
penalty prescribed but to the penalty imposed as determined by the court.

Illustration:

Penalties imposed are –

One prision correcional – minimum – 2 years and 4 months

One arresto mayor - 1 month and 1 day to 6 months

One prision mayor - 6 years and 1 day to 12 years

92
Do not commit the mistake of applying the Three- Fold Rule in this case. Never apply the ThreeFold
rule when there are only three sentences. Even if you add the penalties, you can never arrive at a
sum higher than the product of the most severe multiplied by three.

The common mistake is, if given a situation, whether the Three-Fold Rule could be applied. If
asked, if you were the judge, what penalty would you impose, for purposes of imposing the penalty,
the court is not at liberty to apply the Three-Fold Rule, whatever the sum total of penalty for each
crime committed, even if it would amount to 1,000 years or more. It is only when the convict is
serving sentence that the prison authorities should determine how long he should stay in jail.

This rule will apply only if sentences are to be served successively.

Art. 71. Graduated scales. — In the case in which the law prescribed a penalty
lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules
prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.

The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which
is comprised the given penalty.

The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the
following graduated scales:

SCALE NO. 1
1. Death,
2. Reclusion perpetua,
3. Reclusion temporal,
4. Prision mayor,
5. Prision correccional,
6. Arresto mayor,
7. Destierro,
8. Arresto menor, 9. Public censure,
10. Fine.

SCALE NO. 2
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
2. Temporal absolute disqualification
3. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for,
the right to follow a profession or calling,
4. Public censure, 5. Fine.

Art. 72. Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities. — The civil liabilities of
a person found guilty of two or more offenses shall be satisfied by following
the chronological order of the dates of the judgments rendered against him,
beginning with the first in order of time.

• the penalties shall be satisfied according to the scale of Art 70

Art. 73. Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory penalties. —

Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty which, by provision of law,
carries with it other penalties, according to the provisions of Articles 40, 41,
42, 43 and 44 of this Code, it must be understood that the accessory
penalties are also imposed upon the convict.

93
• subsidiary penalties are deemed imposed. However, the subsidiary imprisonment
must be expressly stated in the decision.

The rule that the principal penalty imposed carries with it the accessory penalties does
not mean that the accused would serve subsidiary imprisonment in case he is not able to pay the
pecuniary liabilities imposed in the judgment. Subsidiary imprisonment must be expressly
ordered.

Art. 74. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases. — In cases in
which the law prescribes a penalty higher than another given penalty,
without specially designating the name of the former, if such higher penalty
should be that of death, the same penalty and the accessory penalties of
Article 40, shall be considered as the next higher penalty.

• if the decision or law says higher than RP or 2 degrees than RT, then the penalty
imposed is RP or RT as the case may be. Death must be designated by name.
However, for the other penalties, this does not apply.

Example: the penalty for crime X is 2 degrees lower than RP. The penalty imposed is
prision mayor.

Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees. —
Whenever it may be necessary to increase or reduce the penalty of fine by
one or more degrees, it shall be increased or reduced, respectively, for each
degree, by one-fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law, without
however, changing the minimum.

The same rules shall be observed with regard of fines that do not consist of
a fixed amount, but are made proportional.
• To get the lower degree:
Max: reduce by one-fourth

Min: the same

With respect to the penalty of fine, if the fine has to be lowered by degree either because the felony
committed is only attempted or frustrated or because there is an accomplice or an accessory
participation, the fine is lowered by deducting 1/4 of the maximum amount of the fine from such
maximum without changing the minimum amount prescribed by law.

Illustration:

If the penalty prescribed is a fine ranging from P200.00 to P500.00, but the felony is frustrated so
that the penalty should be imposed one degree lower, 1/4 of P500.00 shall be deducted therefrom.
This is done by deducting P125.00 from P500.00, leaving a difference of P375.00. The penalty one
degree lower is P375.00. To go another degree lower, P125.00 shall again be deducted from
P375.00 and that would leave a difference of P250.00. Hence, the penalty another degree lower
is a fine ranging from P200.00 to P250.00. If at all, the fine has to be lowered further, it cannot go
lower than P200.00. So, the fine will be imposed at P200.00. This rule applies when the fine has
to be lowered by degree.

Art. 76. Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. — The legal period of
duration of divisible penalties shall be considered as divided into three
parts, forming three periods, the minimum, the medium, and the maximum
in the manner shown in the following table:

94
Art. 77. When the penalty is a complex one composed of three distinct penalties.
— In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of three distinct
penalties, each one shall form a period; the lightest of them shall be the
minimum the next the medium, and the most severe the maximum period.

Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the forms specially
provided for in this Code, the periods shall be distributed, applying by
analogy the prescribed rules.

• if there are 3 distinct penalties; there shall be a minimum, a medium and a maximum
Example: Reclusion temporal max to death

EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

Art. 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. — No penalty shall be

executed except by virtue of a final judgment.

A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by
law, nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly
authorized thereby.

In addition to the provisions of the law, the special regulations prescribed

for the government of the institutions in which the penalties are to be
suffered shall be observed with regard to the character of the work to be
performed, the time of its performance, and other incidents connected
therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and other
persons, the relief which they may receive, and their diet.

The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in
different institutions, or at least into different departments and also for the
correction and reform of the convicts.

• Only penalty by final judgment can be executed. Judgment is final if the accused has
not appealed within 15 days or he has expressly waived in writing that he will not
appeal.

An appeal suspends the service of the sentence imposed by the trial court. In the absence
of an appeal, the law contemplates a speedy execution of the sentence, and in the orderly
administration of justice, the defendant should be forthwith remanded to the sheriff for the
execution of the judgment.

• There could be no subsidiary liability if it was not expressly ordered in the judgment

Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of
insanity. — When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final
sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said sentence shall be
suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the provisions of the
second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of article 12 being observed in
the corresponding cases.

If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his sentence shall be
executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the
provisions of this Code.

95
The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the
insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence

• Cases of insanity:
a) after final sentence, suspend the sentence regarding the personal penalties
b) if he recovers, the sentence is executed unless it has prescribed
c) the payment of civil or pecuniary liabilities shall not be suspended

Art 80 (as amended by PD 603: Child and Youth Welfare Code)

a) youthful offender – over 9 but under 18 at time of the commission of the offense

A child nine years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be
exempt from criminal liability and shall be committed to the care of his or her father or mother,
or nearest relative or family friend in the discretion of the court and subject to its supervision.
The same shall be done for a child over nine years and under fifteen years of age at the time of
the commission of the offense, unless he acted with discernment, in which case he shall be
proceeded against in accordance with Article 192.

The Revised Penal Code declared a youthful offender to be one who is under 18 years old
at the time he committed the crime attributed to him. For him to be entitled to the benefits of
the law, the sentence must also be made while the accused is under 18 years of age. If the accused
is already 18 years old or above upon promulgation, he will no longer be entitled to a suspension
of his sentence.

The suspension of the sentence is only observed if the youthful offender commits he
crime above nine years and below 18 years of age and the promulgation of the judgment is
likewise done while the accused is under 18 years of age.

The suspension of sentence is not automatic or mandatory for the court to implement.
The youthful offender must apply for suspension.

b) a youthful offender held for examination or trial who cannot furnish bail will be
committed to the DSWD/local rehab center or detention home

c) judgment of the court shall not be pronounced but suspended except for the
ff cases:
1. those who previously enjoyed a suspension of sentence
2. those convicted of death or life imprisonment
3. those convicted for an offense by the military tribunals

d) the DSWD may dismiss the case if the youth behaves properly

e) the records of the proceeding shall be privileged and shall not be disclosed

f) the civil liability of the youthful offender may be voluntary assumed by a relative or
a friend

The civil liability for acts committed by a youthful offender shall devolve upon the
offender’s father and, in the case of his death or incapacity, upon the mother, or in case of her
death or incapacity, upon the guardian. Civil liability may also be voluntarily assumed by a relative
or family friend of the youthful offender.

g) the parent or guardian of the child is liable when he aids, abets or connives w/ the
commission of the crime or does an act producing, promoting or contributing to the
child’s being a juvenile delinquent.

h) The penalties for the parent or guardian: Fine not exceeding 500 and/or
imprisonment not exceeding 2 years

96
Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. — The death
sentence shall be executed with preference to any other and shall consist in
putting the person under sentence to death by lethal injection. The death
sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of Prisons,
endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the person under
sentence during the lethal injection as well as during the proceedings prior
to the execution.

The Director of the Bureau of Corrections shall take steps to insure that the
lethal injection to be administered is sufficient to cause instantaneous death
of the convict.

The death sentence shall be carried out not earlier than one(1) year but not
later than eighteen(18) months after the judgment has become final and
executory without prejudice to the exercise by the President of his clemency
powers at all times . (As amended by RA# 8177)

DEATH PENALTY

To which crimes imposed:

Applies only to those crimes which are specified under RA 7659. If a crime is not included
in the list of heinous crimes, the penalty cannot be validly imposed for said crime.

What are heinous crimes?

These are grievous, odious and hateful offenses, which by reason of their inherent or
manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the
common standards and norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society.

What are the heinous crimes under RA 7659?

1. Treason
2. Qualified piracy / mutiny
3. Qualified bribery
4. Parricide
5. Murder
6. Infanticide
7. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
8. Robbery with Homicide
9. Robbery with rape
10.Robbery with Intentional Mutilation
11.Robbery with arson
12.Destructive Arson
13.Rape committed with the use of deadly weapon
14.Rape committed by two or more persons
15.Rape with Homicide / Attempted rape with homicide
16.Rape under certain circumstances
17.Plunder
18.Violation of RA 6425, where quantity involved is more than or equal to that certified under
Sec. 20 thereof
19. Carnapping where the owner or occupant of the vehicle is killed

Art. 82. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance to the culprit.
— The court shall designate a working day for the execution but not the hour
thereof; and such designation shall not be communicated to the offender
before sunrise of said day, and the execution shall not take place until after

97
the expiration of at least eight hours following the notification, but before
sunset. During the interval between the notification and the execution, the
culprit shall, in so far as possible, be furnished such assistance as he may
request in order to be attended in his last moments by priests or ministers
of the religion he professes and to consult lawyers, as well as in order to
make a will and confer with members of his family or persons in charge of
the management of his business, of the administration of his property, or of
the care of his descendants.

• Designate a working day w/c shall not be communicated to the offender before the
sunrise of said day. The execution shall not take place until after the expiration of at
least 8 hrs following such notification.

• He can execute a will.

Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. — The death
sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman while she is pregnant or within
one(1) year after delivery, nor upon any person over seventy years of age. In
this last case, the death sentence shall be commuted to the penalty of
reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties provided in Article 40.

In all cases where the death sentence has become final, the records of the
case shall be forwarded immediately by the Supreme Court to the Office of
the President for possible exercise of the pardoning power. (As amended by
Sec. 25, RA# 7659)

• Death sentence commuted to RP:

a) woman, while pregnant or within 1 yr after delivery (only suspended)

b) person over 70 years old.

Art. 84. Place of execution and persons who may witness the same. — The
execution shall take place in the penitentiary or Bilibid in a space closed to
the public view and shall be witnessed only by the priests assisting the
offender and by his lawyers, and by his relatives, not exceeding six, if he so
request, by the physician and the necessary personnel of the penal
establishment, and by such persons as the Director of Prisons may
authorize.

Art. 85. Provisions relative to the corpse of the person executed and its burial. —
Unless claimed by his family, the corpse of the culprit shall, upon the
completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the execution, be turned
over to the institute of learning or scientific research first applying for it, for
the purpose of study and investigation, provided that such institute shall
take charge of the decent burial of the remains. Otherwise, the Director of
Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the culprit at government
expense, granting permission to be present thereat to the members of the
family of the culprit and the friends of the latter. In no case shall the burial
of the body of a person sentenced to death be held with pomp.

Art. 86. Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision

correccional and arresto mayor. — The penalties of reclusion perpetua,

98
reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional and arresto mayor,
shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments
provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by
law in the future.

Art. 87. Destierro. — Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted
to enter the place or places designated in the sentence, nor within the radius
therein specified, which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25
kilometers from the place designated.

• Destierro shall be imposed in the ff cases:

a) death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted under exceptional
circumstance
b) person fails to give bond for good behavior
c) concubine’s penalty for the crime of concubinage
d) lowering the penalty by degrees

• Execution of Distierro
a) Convict shall not be permitted to enter the place designated in the sentence nor
within the radius specified, which shall not be more than 250 and not less than 25
km from the place designated.
b) If the convict enters the prohibited area, he commits evasion of sentence

Art. 88. Arresto menor. — The penalty of arresto menor shall be served in the
municipal jail, or in the house of the defendant himself under the surveillance
of an officer of the law, when the court so provides in its decision, taking
into consideration the health of the offender and other reasons which may
seem satisfactory to it.

• Served where:
In the municipal jail
In the house of the offender, but under the surveillance of an officer of the law
whenever the court so provides in the decision due to the health of the offender. But
the reason is not satisfactory just because the offender is a respectable member of
the community

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — Criminal liability is

totally extinguished:
re-election to public office is not one of the grounds by which criminal liability is extinguished. This
is only true to administrative cases but not criminal cases.

(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.

• Extinguishment of criminal liability is a ground of motion to quash

• Criminal liability whether before or after final judgment is extinguished upon death
because it is a personal penalty

• Pecuniary penalty is extinguished only when death occurs before final judgement.

PP vs. BAYOTAS

99
 1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as
well as the civil liability based solely thereon.

2. The claim of civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may
also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict.

3. Where the civil liability survives, an action for recovery therefore, may be pursued but
only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1 Rule 111 of the 1985
Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. This separate civil action may be enforced
either against the executor/administrator of the estate of the accused, depending on the
source obligation upon which the same is based as explained above.

If the act or omission complained of gives rise to a cause of action arising from quasi-
delict, the separate civil action must be filed against the executor or administrator of the estate
of the accused pursuant to Sec. 1, Rule 87 of the Rules of Court.

If the same act or omission complained of also arises from contract, the separate civil
action must be filed against the estate of the accused, pursuant to Sec. 5, Rule 86 of the Rules of
Court.

When the civil liability does not arise from a certain crime and predicated on law, contract,
quasi-contract, or quasi-delict, the civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of the accused
during the pendency of the trial of a criminal action or appeal.

What is contemplated in Article 89 is that the accused who died before the finality of a
verdict or conviction cannot be ordered to make restitution, reparation or indemnification to the
offended party by way of moral and exemplary damages.

Where there are several accused, the death of one does not result to the dismissal of the
action because the liabilities, whether civil or criminal of said accused are distinct and separate.
The death of the offended party pending the trial is not included in the total extinction of
criminal liability under Art. 89, neither is it a ground for the dismissal of a criminal complaint or
information. (Pp vs. Bundalian, 117 SCRA 718)

(2) By service of the sentence

• Crime is a debt, hence extinguished upon payment

• Service does not extinguish civil liability

.(3) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects

Amnesty – is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or general pardon. It wipes
all traces and vestiges of the crime but does not extinguish civil liability

(4) By absolute pardon

• Pardon – an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted w/ the execution of laws,
which exempts the individual from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime.
Pardon, although absolute does not erase the effects of conviction. Pardon only excuses the
convict from serving the sentence. There is an exception to this and that is when the pardon was
granted when the convict had already served the sentence such that there is no more service of
sentence to be executed then the pardon shall be understood as intended to erase the effects of
the conviction. But if he was serving sentence when he was pardoned, that pardon will not wipe
out the effects of the crime, unless the language of the pardon absolutely relieve the offender of all
the effects thereof. Considering that recidivism does not prescribe, no matter how long ago was
the first conviction, he shall still be a recidivist.

When the crime carries with it moral turpitude, the offender even if granted pardon shall still remain
disqualified from those falling in cases where moral turpitude is a bar.

100
In Monsanto v. Factoran, Jr., 170 SCRA 191, it was held that absolute pardon does not ipso facto
entitle the convict to reinstatement to the public office forfeited by reason of his conviction. Although
pardon restores his eligibility for appointment to that office, the pardoned convict must reapply for
the new appointment
AMNESTY PARDON
Extended to classes of persons who may be Exercised individually by the president (any
guilty of political offenses crime)
Exercised even before trial or investigation Exercised when one is convicted
Looks backward and abolishes the offense Looks forward and relieves the offender of the
itself consequences
Does not extinguish civil liability Same
A public act that needs the declaration of the A private act of the president
president with the concurrence of Congress
Courts should take judicial notice Must be pleaded and proved
Pardon becomes valid only when there is a final judgment. If given before this, it is premature and
hence void. There is no such thing as a premature amnesty, because it does not require a final
judgment; it may be given before final judgment or after it.

(5) By prescription of the crime

• When the crime prescribes, the state loses the right to prosecute

• Prescription of a crime – is the loss/forfeiture of the right of the state to prosecute

the offender after the lapse of a certain time.

(6) By prescription of the penalty

• Means: the loss/forfeiture of the right of government to execute the final sentence after
the lapse of a certain time. Conditions: there must be final judgement and the period
has elapsed.

(6) By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Art 344 of this
Code

In the case of marriage, do not say that it is applicable for the crimes under Article 344. It is only
true in the crimes of rape, abduction, seduction and acts of lasciviousness. Do not say that it
is applicable to private crimes because the term includes adultery and concubinage. Marriages in
these cases may even compound the crime of adultery or concubinage. It is only in the crimes of
rape, abduction, seduction and acts of lasciviousness that the marriage by the offender with the
offended woman shall extinguish civil liability, not only criminal liability of the principal who marries
the offended woman, but also that of the accomplice and accessory, if there are any.

Co-principals who did not themselves directly participate in the execution of the crime but who only
cooperated, will also benefit from such marriage, but not when such co-principal himself took direct
part in the execution of the crime.

Marriage as a ground for extinguishing civil liability must have been contracted in good faith. The
offender who marries the offended woman must be sincere in the marriage and therefore must
actually perform the duties of a husband after the marriage, otherwise, notwithstanding such
marriage, the offended woman, although already his wife can still prosecute him again, although
the marriage remains a valid marriage. Do not think that the marriage is avoided or annulled. The
marriage still subsists although the offended woman may re-file the complaint. The Supreme Court
ruled that marriage contemplated must be a real marriage and not one entered to and not just to
evade punishment for the crime committed because the offender will be compounding the wrong
he has committed.

In cases of multiple rapes, however, the principle does not apply. Thus, if A, B and C raped
W in that when A was having sex with W, B and C were holing the legs and arms, and when it was

101
B’s turn, A and C were the ones holding W’s legs and arms, and when C was the one having sex
with W, the ones holding her arms and legs were A and B. Even if later on, A contracted marriage
with W, there is no extinction of penal responsibility because this is a case of multiple rapes.

The grant of probation may be considered as a form of extinction of criminal liability

which was bestowed while accused who has never been encarcerated, was out on bail, may thus
be categorized as total extinction thereof. However, if it was granted after the conviction of the
accused who was in jail, it can be considered as partial extinction only. It must be noted however,
that unlike in service of sentence, in probation, the probationer is still required to report to
Probation Officer at a certain period until the duration of the probation period.

Art. 90. Prescription of crime. — Crimes punishable by death, reclusion

perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.

Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen

years.

Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with

the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe
in five years.

The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.

The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six
months.

Light offenses prescribe in two months.

When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall
be made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first,
second and third paragraphs of this article. (As amended by RA 4661, approved
June 19, 1966.)

• In computing for the period, the first day is excluded and the last day included. Subject
to leap years

• When the last day of the prescriptive period falls on a Sunday or a legal holiday, the
info can no longer be filed the ff day

• Simple slander prescribes in 2 months and grave slander in 6 months

• Since destierro is a correctional penalty, it prescribes in 10 years. Afflictive penalties,

15 years.

• If compound penalty, basis will be the highest penalty

Offense punished with a fine

To determine whether the prescriptive period of an offense punished with a fine is

imposed as a single or as an alternative penalty, such fine should not be reduced or converted
into a prison term. It should be classified into an afflictive, correctional, or light penalty pursuant
to Article 26.

When fine is imposed as an alternative penalty to imprisonment (imposed together w/

a penalty lower than the fine), and fine constitute a higher penalty than the penalty of
imprisonment, the basis of the prescriptive period should be the fine.

102
 The rule on prescription as to fines does not refer to subsidiary imprisonment. It takes into
consideration the nature of the penalty as afflictive, correctional and light. It is a rule that
prescriptive period is always based on the fine even if there is a subsidiary imprisonment.

• Prescription begins to run from the discovery thereof. Interrupted when proceedings
are instituted and shall begin to run again when the proceedings are dismissed.

The defense of prescription cannot be waived and it may be raised during the trial or even on
appeal. However, the defense of prescription of crime cannot defeat the right of the state to
recover its properties which were unlawfully acquired by public officials.

• Prescription does not take away the court’s jurisdiction but only absolves the defendant
and acquits him.

Extinction of crime by prescription does not extinguish civil liability unless extinction proceeds
from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil liability might arise did
not exist.

Where the special law such as the Copyright Law provides for its own prescriptive period,
said special law will govern. Act 3326 will not be applied.

Prescription of Crimes (Art. 90)

Penalty or Felony Time after which Crime will Prescribe
Death, reclusion perpetua or 20 years
reclusion temporal
Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Correctional penalty, except arresto mayor 10 years

Arresto mayor 5 years

Libel or other similar offenses 1 year
Oral defamation and slander by deed 6 months
Light offenses 2 months
Prescriptive periods of offenses punished under special laws and municipal ordinances (Act No.
3763)
Penalty or Offense Time after which offense will prescribe
Fine only; or 1 year
imprisonment for not more than 1 month, Or
both,

Imprisonment for more than 1 month, but less 4 years

than 2 years
Imprisonment for 2 years or more but 8 years
less than 6 years

Imprisonment for 6 years or more 12 years

Internal Revenue Law offenses 5 years
Violations of municipal ordinances 2 months
Violations of the regulations or conditions of 2 months
certificate of convenience by the Public Service
Commission

Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. — The period of prescription

shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the
offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and shall be interrupted by

103
the filing of the complaint or information, and shall commence to run again
when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or
acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.

The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippine Archipelago.

The aforementioned rule, however is not applicable in the following cases:

a. In continuing crimes where the prescriptive period will start to run only at the termination
of the intended result;

b. In crimes which are not concealed because there is a constructive notice to the public,
such as to those which involve a public document registered in public offices. It is a rule
that registration is tantamount to a declaration to the whole world. In such cases, the
prescriptive period shall commence from the time of the registration of the document.

c. In the crime of false testimony where the prescriptive period is reckoned from the day of
final judgment is rendered by the court and not at the time the false testimony was made.

• If there is nothing concealed (appears in a public document), the crime commences to

run on the date of the commission
• Period of prescription for crimes that is continuing never runs

• Crime needs to be discovered by:

a) offended party
b) authorities
c) their agents

• If a person witnesses the crime but only tells the authorities 25 years later, prescription
commences on the day the authorities were told.
“Commission of the crime is public” -- This does not mean alone that the crime was within public
knowledge or committed in public.

Illustration:
In the crime of falsification of a document that was registered in the proper registry of the
government like the Registry of Property or the Registry of Deeds of the Civil registry, the
falsification is deemed public from the time the falsified document was registered or recorded in
such public office so even though, the offended party may not really know of the falsification, the
prescriptive period of the crime shall already run from the moment the falsified document was
recorded in the public registry. So in the case where a deed of sale of a parcel of land which was
falsified was recorded in the corresponding Registry of Property, the owner of the land came to
know of the falsified transaction only after 10 years, so he brought the criminal action only then.

The Supreme Court ruled that the crime has already prescribed. From the moment the falsified
document is registered in the Registry of Property, the prescriptive period already commenced to
run (Constructive notice rule).

• What interrupts prescription?

a) preliminary examination or investigation w/c is similar to judicial proceeding

b) filing the proper complaint w/ the fiscal’s office and the prosecutor. Police not included.

c) Filing complaint with the court that has proper jurisdiction

The prescription of the crime is interrupted or suspended –

(1) When a complaint is filed in a proper barangay for conciliation or mediation as required by
Chapter 7, Local Government Code, but the suspension of the prescriptive period is good
only for 60 days. After which the prescription will resume to run, whether the conciliation
or mediation is terminated for not;

104
(2) When criminal case is filed in the prosecutor’s office, the prescription of the crime is
suspended until the accused is convicted or the proceeding is terminated for a cause not
attributable to the accused.

Holiday is not a legal efficient cause which interrupts the prescription of the offense.
Where the last day to file an information falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, the prescriptive period
cannot be extended up to the next working day.

But where the crime is subject to Summary Procedure, the prescription of the crime will be
suspended only when the information is already filed with the trial court. It is not the filing of the
complaint, but the filing of the information in the trial which will suspend the prescription of the
crime.

If the case involves a minor offense and it is filed in the fiscal’s office, the filing of the case
in the fiscal’s office will not interrupt the running of the period of prescription.

• When the period commences to run again

a) When the proceeding is terminated without the accused being convicted or
acquitted

b) When the proceeding is unjustifiably stopped for a reason not imputable to the
offender
• “when such proceedings terminate” – termination that is final; an unappealed conviction
or acquittal

• “unjustifiably stopped for any reason” – example: accused evades arrest, proceedings
must be stopped

• Art 91 applies to a special law when said law does not provide for the application but
only provides for the period of prescription

The prevailing rule now is, prescription of the crime is not waivable, When a crime prescribes, the
State loses the right to prosecute the offender, hence, even though the offender may not have filed
a motion to quash on this ground the trial court, but after conviction and during the appeal he
learned that at the time the case was filed, the crime has already prescribed, such accused can
raise the question of prescription even for the first time on appeal, and the appellate court shall
have no jurisdiction to continue, if legally, the crime has indeed prescribed.

Art. 92. When and how penalties prescribe. — The penalties imposed by final
sentence prescribe as follows:

1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years;

2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years;
3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the exception of the penalty
of arresto mayor, which prescribes in five years;
4. Light penalties, in one year.

When Penalties Prescribe (Art. 92)

Penalty Prescriptive Period
Death 20 years
Reclusion perpetua
Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Correctional penalties, except arresto mayor 10 years

Arresto mayor 5 years

Light penalties 1 year
• Note that final sentence must be imposed

105
 The penalty, to be subject of prescription must have been imposed by final judgment.
Thus, if A after conviction by the trial court, appealed the decision, and escaped from jail where
he has been detained during the trial, the penalty will never prescribe. In prescription of penalty,
the offender must be serving sentence, and must have escaped, committing the crime of Evasion
of Sentence. From the day he escaped, the prescription of penalty commence to run.

Problem: A was sentenced to reclusion temporal for homicide and while serving sentence,
for January 1, 1980. He must be able to elude authorities up to January 2, 1995 to consider the
penalty prescribed. Supposed he was arrested after five (5) years of escape – that is, on January
1, 1985, and was able to hide for just ten (10) more years. The five-year period during his first
escape must have to be considered for purposes of completing the fifteen (15)-year period for
the prescription of the penalty of Homicide.

• If a convict can avail of mitigating circumstances and the penalty is lowered, it is still
the original penalty that is used as the basis for prescription. However, if the convict
already serves a portion of his sentence and escapes after, the penalty that was
imposed (not the original) shall be the basis for prescription
• Fines less than 200 fall under light penalty. Those above are correccional.

Art. 93. Computation of the prescription of penalties. — The period of

prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the date when the
culprit should evade the service of his sentence, and it shall be interrupted
if the defendant should give himself up, be captured, should go to some
foreign country with which this Government has no extradition treaty, or
should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of
prescription.

• Elements:
a) penalty is final

b) convict evaded the sentence

c) convict has not given himself up

d) penalty has prescribed because of lapse of time from the date of the evasion of
the service of the sentence

On the prescription of the penalty, the period will only commence to run when the convict has begun
to serve the sentence. Actually, the penalty will prescribe from the moment the convict evades the
service of the sentence. So if an accused was convicted in the trial court, and the conviction
becomes final and executory, so this fellow was arrested to serve the sentence, on the way to the
penitentiary, the vehicle carrying him collided with another vehicle and overturned, thus enabling
the prisoner to escape, no matter how long such convict has been a fugitive from justice, the penalty
imposed by the trial court will never prescribe because he has not yet commenced the service of
his sentence. For the penalty to prescribe, he must be brought to Muntinlupa, booked there, placed
inside the cell and thereafter he escapes.

• Interruption of the period

If the defendant surrenders

If he is captured

If he should go into a foreign country with which the Philippines has no extradition
treaty

Presently the Philippines has an extradition treaty with Taiwan, Indonesia, Canada, Australia,
USA and Switzerland

If he should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription

106
The moment the convict commits another crime while he is fugitive from justice, prescriptive period
of the penalty shall be suspended and shall not run in the meantime. The crime committed does
not include the initial evasion of service of sentence that the convict must perform before the
penalty shall begin to prescribe, so that the initial crime of evasion of service of sentence does not
suspend the prescription of penalty, it is the commission of other crime, after the convict has
evaded the service of penalty that will suspend such period.

Acceptance of a conditional pardon(People v. Puntilos)

• If a government has an extradition treaty w/ the country to w/c a convict escaped and
the crime is not included in the treaty, the running of the prescription is interrupted

• Sentence evasion clearly starts the running of the prescription. It does not interrupt it.
Acceptance of the conditional pardon interrupts the prescriptive period.

• Rolito Go case: since he was captured, he is only supposed to serve the remainder of
his sentence. Reason: during the period he escaped, his existence is one of fear and
discomfort

Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. — Criminal liability is

extinguished partially:

1. By conditional pardon;
2. By commutation of the sentence; and
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is
serving his sentence.

Conditional pardon – contract between the sovereign power of the executive and the
convict
• Convict shall not violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines
• Violation of conditions:
Offender is re-arrested and re-incarcerated
Prosecution under Art. 159

Commutation – change in the decision of the court by the chief regarding the
(1) degree of the penalty;

(2) by decreasing the length of the imprisonment or fine

• Commutation allowed when:

a) person over 70 yrs old
b) 10 justices fail to reach a decision affirming the death penalty

• Consent not necessary in commutation

• Prisoner is also allowed special time allowance for loyalty w/c is 1/5 deduction of
the period of his sentence.

Parole – consists in the suspension of the sentence of a convict after serving the minimum
term of the indeterminate penalty, without granting pardon, prescribing the terms upon
which the sentence shall be suspended. In case his parole conditions are not observed,
a convict may be returned to the custody and continue to serve his sentence without
deducting the time that elapsed.
CONDITIONAL PARDON PAROLE
Given after final judgement Given after service of the minimum penalty
Granted by Chief Executive Given by the Bd of Pardons and Parole

107
For violation, convict may not be prosecuted For violations, may be rearrested, convict serves
under 159 remaining sentence
• Good conduct allowance during confinement
Deduction for the term of sentence for good behavior

Good conduct allowance

This includes the allowance for loyalty under Article 98, in relation to Article 158. A convict who
escapes the place of confinement on the occasion of disorder resulting from a conflagration,
earthquake or similar catastrophe or during a mutiny in which he has not participated and he
returned within 48 hours after the proclamation that the calamity had already passed, such convict
shall be given credit of 1/5 of the original sentence from that allowance for his loyalty of coming
back. Those who did not leave the penitentiary under such circumstances do not get such
allowance for loyalty. Article 158 refers only to those who leave and return.

Art. 95. Obligation incurred by person granted conditional pardon. —

Any person who has been granted conditional pardon shall incur the
obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed therein
otherwise, his non-compliance with any of the conditions specified shall
result in the revocation of the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall
be applied to him.
• Condition of pardon is limited to unserved portion of the sentence, unless an intention to
extend it beyond the time is manifest

Art. 96. Effect of commutation of sentence. — The commutation of the original

sentence for another of a different length and nature shall have the legal
effect of substituting the latter in the place of the former.

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:

1. During the first two years of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a

deduction of five days for each month of good behavior;

2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he

shall be allowed a deduction of eight days for each month of good behavior;

3. During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days for each month
of good behavior; and

4. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment, he

shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month of good behavior.

• Allowance for good conduct not applicable when prisoner released under conditional
pardon.

• Good conduct time allowance is given in consideration of good conduct of prisoner

while he is serving sentence.
Allowances for Good conduct per year
Years Allowance
First 2 years 5 days per month of good behavior
rd th
3 to 5 years 8 days per month of good behavior

108
Following years up to 10th year 10 days per month of good behavior
11th year and successive years 15 days per month of good behavior
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
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 to in said article.

• Special time allowance for loyalty of prisoners:

The article applies only to prisoners who escaped

deduction of 1/5 of the period of sentence of prisoner who having evaded the
service of his sentence during the calamity or catastrophe mentioned in Art 158,
gives himself up to the authorities w/in 48 hrs ff the issuance of the proclamation
by the President announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe

deduction based on the original sentence and not on the unexpired portion
• Art 158 provides for increased penalties:
- a convict who has evaded the service of his sentence by leaving the penal institution
on the occasion of disorder resulting from conflagration, earthquake or similar
catastrophe or during mutiny in which he did not participate is liable to an increased
penalty (1/5 of the time still remaining to be served – not to exceed 6 months), if he
fails to give himself up to the authorities w/in 48 hrs ff the issuance of a proclamation
by the President announcing the passing away of the calamity.

Art. 99. Who grants time allowances. — Whenever lawfully justified, the
Director of Prisons shall grant allowances for good conduct. Such
allowances once granted shall not be revoked.

a) authority to grant time allowance for good conduct is exclusively vested in the Director
of prisons (e.g. provincial warden cannot usurp Director’s authority)

b) it is not an automatic right and once granted, cannot be revoked by him

CIVIL LIABILITY
Acts or omissions resulting in felonies produce two classes of injuries. The first injury is
directed against the state and is known as “social injury”. The offended party is the government
or the collective right of our people. It is repaired through the imposition of penalties. The second
injury is directed to the private offended party and is known as “personal injury”. The injury is
caused to the victim of the crime who may have suffered damage, either to his person, to his
property, or to his honor which is compensated by way of indemnity which is civil in nature.

A person criminally liable is also civilly liable. The award of civil damages arising from
crime is governed by the Revised Penal Code, subject to the provisions of Article 32, 33 and 34 of
the New Civil Code. Procedural aspect of the civil liability of the accused, Rule 111 of the Revised
Rules of Court governs. Section 1, Rule 111 provides that:

Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. – When a criminal action is instituted,
the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is implied instituted with the criminal action, unless
the offended party waives the civil action, reserves his right to institute it separately, or institutes
the civil action prior to the criminal action.

A waiver of any of the civil actions extinguishes the others. The institution of, or the
reservation of the right to file, any of said civil actions separately waives the others.

109
 In no case may the offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission
of the accused.

In cases wherein the amount of damages, other than actual, is alleged in the complaint
or information, the corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the filing
thereof in court for trial.

Civil liability in the aforecited rule is predicted on the crime committed by the offender. If
the civil liability arose from crimes covered under Articles 32, 33 and 34 and 2176 of the New Civil
Code, an independent civil action can be instituted, either before or after the filing of the criminal
case, provided that in the latter case, the offended party makes an express reservation to file a
separate civil action. When a civil action is filed as stated above, the same is suspended upon filing
of the criminal action, meaning, the trial is not to be done until the criminal case is resolved or
decided. This rule, however, is not applicable if the civil liability that is separately instituted, arises
or originates from the provisions of Articles 32, 33 and 34 of the Civil Code.
It is necessary, however that the civil liability under all said articles arise from the same
act or omission of the accused.

When the civil liability arising from the crime is different from civil liability arising from
the Civil Code, if civil liability is already awarded in the criminal action, the offender cannot again
claim civil liability arising from crime, and one arising from quasi-delict.

Civil Liabilities vs. Pecuniary Liabilities

Civil Liability Pecuniary Liability
Includes reparation of damage caused and Includes reparation of damages caused and
indemnification for consequential damages indemnification for consequential damages

Includes restitution Does not include restitution

Does not include fines and costs of the Includes fine and the costs of the proceedings
proceedings
Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. — Every person criminally
liable for a felony is also civilly liable.

Basis: obligation to repair or to make whole the damage caused to another by reason of
an act or omission, whether done intentionally or negligently and whether or not
punishable by law

If the crime is one from which no civil liability may arise, like Illegal Possession of Firearm
(P.D. 1866 as amended by R.A. 8294), or illegal sale, transport or possession of prohibited drugs
(R.A. 64225 as amended by R.A. 7659), the convict incurs no civil liability.

Dual character of the crime as against:

a) the state because of the disturbance of peace and order
b) the private person injured unless it involves the crime of treason, rebellion,
espionage, contempt and others where no civil liability arises on the part of the
offender either because there are no damages or there is no private person
injured by the crime

The civil liability of the accused may be enforced in the criminal action or in a direct civil
action. The choice is in the offended party. If his preference is to prosecute the civil action in the
criminal proceedings, he cannot be compelled to institute a separate civil action instead. (Pp vs.
Guido, 57 Phil. 52)

Damage that may be recovered in criminal cases:

• Crimes against persons, like crime of physical injuries – whatever he spent for
treatment of wounds, doctor’s fees, medicines as well as salary or wages unearned

110
• Moral Damages: seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts, adultery or
concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest, illegal search, libel, slander or any
other form of defamation, malicious prosecution

• Exemplary Damages: imposed when crime was committed with one or more
aggravating circumstances

NOTES:
a) If there is no damage caused by the commission of the crime, offender is not civilly
liable

b) Dismissal of the info or the crime action does not affect the right of the offended party
to institute or continue the civil action already instituted arising from the offense,
because such dismissal does not carry with it the extinction of the civil one.
c) When accused is acquitted on ground that his guilt has not been proven beyond
reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be
instituted

When during the trial what was established was only the civil aspect of the case and the
same facts adduced did not constitute a crime, civil liability is also awarded. (Padilla vs. Court of
Appeals, 129 SCRA 558)

d) Exemption from criminal liability in favor of an imbecile or insane person, and a person
under 9 yrs, or over 9 but under 15 who acted w/ discernment and those acting under
the impulse of irresistible force or under the impulse of an uncontrolable fear of an
equal or greater injury does not include exemption from civil liability.

e) Acquittal in the criminal action for negligence does not preclude the offended party
from filing a civil action to recover damages, based on the theory that the act is quasi-
delict

f) When the court found the accused guilty of criminal negligence but failed to enter
judgement of civil liability, the private prosecutor has a right to appeal for the purposes
of the civil liability of the accused. The appellate court may remand the case to the trial
court for the latter to include in its judgement the civil liability of the accused

Where the accused was convicted in a criminal case but the court did not make any
pronouncement on his civil liability, such omission on the part of the court will not operate to
prevent or bar the offended party to file a separate civil action. (Bachrach Motors, Inc. vs.
Gamboa, 101 Phil. 1219) Silence is the declaration that the same is reserved by the complainant
and will not operate as res adjudicata.

g) Before expiration of the 15-day for appealing, the trial court can amend the judgement
of conviction by adding a provision for the civil liability of the accused, even if the
convict has started serving the sentence.

h) An independent civil action may be brought by the injured party during the pendency
of the criminal case provided the right is reserved. Reservation is necessary in the ff
cases:
1. any of the cases referred to in Art 32 (violation of ones fundamental rights)

2. defamation, fraud and physical injury (bodily injury and not the crime of
physical injury)(Art.33)

3. civil action is against a member of a city or municipal police force for

refusing or failing to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger
to life or property(Art.34)

4. in an action for damage arising from fault or negligence and there is no pre-
existing contractual relation between the parties (quasi-

111
 delict)(Art.2176)

i) Prejudicial Question – one w/c arises in a case, the resolution of which is a logical
antecedent of the issue involved in said case and the cognizance of which pertains to
another tribunal.

The following requisites must be present:

1. The civil case involves facts intimately related with those of the criminal case; and

2. The resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil action wherein the guilt or
innocence of the accused would necessarily be determined.
(Sec. 5, Rule 111, RRC)
• For the principle to apply, it is essential that there be 2 cases involved, a civil and a
criminal case. Prejudicial questions may be decided before any criminal prosecution
may be instituted or may proceed.

• An independent civil action may be brought by the injured party during the pendency
of the criminal case, provided that the right is reserved

When the civil aspect of the case is not reserved but is prosecuted in the criminal action,
the offended party may, by appropriate motion, pray or ask the trial court to issue a writ of
preliminary attachment against the property of the accused as security for the satisfaction of any
judgment that may be awarded in favor of the offended party upon the termination of the case.

If the offended party in a criminal case is represented by a private prosecutor, he cannot

file a separate civil action.

If the offended party is represented by a private prosecutor and the latter did not produce
evidence to prove civil liability and the case was resolved without the evidence to prove civil
liability and the case was resolved without the court disposing of the civil aspect of the case, the
decision of the court shall operate as a bar to the recovery of civil liability. In a criminal case, the
presence of a private prosecutor is justified because of the civil aspect of the case. As a rule, the
moment the private prosecutor makes a manifestation that the offended party is reserving the
civil aspect of the case, he is immediately disqualified to appear as private prosecutor. (Roas vs.
dela Cruz)

• Extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil, unless
the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgement that the fact from which
the civil might arise did not exist

In a criminal case, the civil liability of the employee is enforceable against the employer if
the former is insolvent.

Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. — The exemption from
criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of article 12 and
in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code does not include exemption from
civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the following rules:

First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil liability for
acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine
years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age, who has
acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such person
under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no
fault or negligence on their part.

Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under his
authority, legal guardianship or control, or if such person be insolvent, said

112
insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, excepting
property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil law.

Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, the persons for
whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in
proportion to the benefit which they may have received.

The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate amount

for which each one shall be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even
approximately, or when the liability also attaches to the Government, or to
the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever the
damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their
agents, indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special
laws or regulations.

Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12, the persons
using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily,
or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be liable, saving
always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution.

General Rule: exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption from civil
liability
Exception: no civil liability in par 4 and 7of art 12. Par 1,2,3,5 and 6 are NOT exempt from
civil liability although exempt from criminal liability

Who are civilly liable for:

a. acts of insane or minor exempt from criminal liability
1. primarily devolve upon perosns having legal authority or control over him,
if at fault or negligent (except if proven that they acted w/o fault or w/ due
diligence)

2. if no fault or negligence, or even w/ fault but is insolvent and there are no

persons having legal authority over them, the property of the insane, minor
or imbecile not exempt from execution shall be held liable.

b. over 15 but under 18 w. discernment β 1. civil code says parent (dad then
mom)_

2. guardians

3. minors own property where a guardian ad litem shall be appointed

In actual practice, when a minor or an insane person is accused of a crime, the court will
inquire who are the persons exercising legal control upon the offender. When the names of such
persons are made known to the court, they are required to participate in the proceedings, not
only to help the accused in his defense but also for said persons in legal authority to protect their
interests as persons primarily liable to pay the civil liability caused by the minor or insane. They
may, however, invoke the defense embodied under Article 2180 of the New Civil Code which
provides that in order to escape civil liability, the persons primarily liable must prove that they
observed all the diligence of a god father of a family to prevent damages.

In the event that the minor or insane has no parents or guardian, the court will appoint a
guardian ad litem to protect the interests of the minor or insane. In such a case, the court will
render judgment fixing the civil liability of the minor or insane and under such a situation, the
property of the minor shall be primarily liable in the payment of civil liability.

113
 *final release of a child based on good conduct does not remove his civil liability
for damages.

c. persons acting under an irresistible force or uncontrollable fear

1. persons using violence or causing the fear are primarily liable

2. if there are none, those doing the act

d. no civil liability in justifying circumstances EXCEPT: par 4 of Art 11, the

one benefited by the act is civilly liable.

e. civil liability in case of state of necessity

Those who benefited by the act and court shall determine the
proportionate amount for which each shall be liable. If the government or
majority of the inhabitants are liable, such will be determined by special laws
or regulations.

Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers and proprietors

of establishments. — In default of the persons criminally liable,
innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or corporations shall be
civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments, in all cases where
a violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special police
regulation shall have been committed by them or their employees.

Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by
robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the
payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests shall have notified
in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, of the
deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed
the directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have given
them with respect to the care and vigilance over such goods. No liability
shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees.

Elements of Par 1:
1. That the innkeeper of the establishment or his employee committed a violation
of municipal ordinance or some general or special police regulation

2. A crime is committed in such establishment

3. Person criminally liable is insolvent

When the foregoing circumstances are present in the commission of the crime, the civil
liability of the offender shall also be the civil liability of the owners of the establishments. Such
civil liability arises only if the person criminally liable is insolvent because the nature of the liability
of the innkeeper and the others is only subsidiary.

Elements of Par 2:
1. guests notified in advance the innkeeper of the deposit of such goods w/in the inn

2. guests followed the directions of the innkeeper w/ respect to the care and vigilance
over the such goods

3. such goods of the guest lodging therein were taken by robbery w/ force upon things
or theft

• When all these are present, the innkeeper is subsidiarily liable

114
• No civil liability in case of robbery w/ violence against or intimidation of person, unless
committed by the innkeeper’s employees

• Actual deposit of the things of the guest to the innkeeper is not necessary, it is enough
that they were within the inn.

The Supreme Court ruled that even though the guest did not obey the rules and regulations
prescribed by the management for safekeeping of the valuables, this does not absolve
management from the subsidiary civil liability. Non-compliance with such rules and regulations by
the guests will only be regarded as contributory negligence, but it won’t absolve the management
from civil liability.

Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. — The subsidiary liability
established in the next preceding article shall also apply to employers,
teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any kind of industry for
felonies committed by their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or
employees in the discharge of their duties.

Elements
a. employer, teacher, person or corporation is engaged in any kind of industry

b. any of their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices of employees commits a felony

while in the discharge of his duties which are related to the business of his employer

c. the said employee is insolvent and has not satisfied his civil liability

Industry – any department or branch of art, occupation or business; especially

one w/c employs so much labor and capital is a distinct branch of trade

Hospitals are not engaged in industry; hence not subsidiarily liable for acts of nurses
Private persons w/o business or industry, not subsidiarilly liable

there is no need to file a civil action against the employer in order to enforce the subsidiary civil
liability for the crime committed by his employee, it is enough that the writ of execution is returned
unsatisfied.

In the trial of the case, if the court will allow the participation of the employer to protect
its civil liability, it cannot put up the defense of diligence of a good father of a family. Such kind of
defense is available only if the action is based or predicated on quasi-delict under Article 2180 of
the Civil Code.

Distinctions between the civil liability of the employer under Article 103 of the Revised
Penal Code and his liability under Article 2180 of the New Civil Code:

1. As to the source of the civil liability of the offender-employer.

Under Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code, the civil liability arises from crime, while
under Article 2180, the obligation arises from quasidelict.

2. As to the nature of the liability of the employer.

The liability of the employer under the RPC is subsidiary, while under the Civil Code, it is
direct and primary;

3. As to whether a separate complaint must be filed against the employer.

Under the RPC, the filing of a separate complaint against the operator for recovery of
subsidiary liability is clear from the decision of conviction against the accused. Under the
Civil Code, the complaint must be filed against the employer because his liability is direct
and primary.

115
 4. As to the necessity of previous conviction in a criminal case.

The RPC requires previous conviction of the offender-employer. Such is not required
under the Civil Code.

5. As to the availability of the defense of the “exercise of diligence of a good father of the
family in the selection and supervision of employee.”

This defense is not available to defeat the employer’s subsidiary liability under the RPC.
On the other hand, the Civil Code allows such defense in favor of the employer.

A judgment of conviction sentencing a defendant employee to pay an indemnity is

conclusive upon the employer in an action for the enforcement
of the latter’s subsidiary liability. (Rotea vs. Halili, 109 Phil. 495)

Acquittal of the driver in the criminal case is not a bar to the prosecution of the civil action
based on quasi-delict. The source of obligation in the criminal case is Article 103, or obligations
arising from crime, while the civil action is based on Article 2176 or quasi-delict. Article 1157 of
the Civil Code provides that quasi-delicts and acts or omissions punishable by law are two
different sources of obligations.( Virata vs. Ochoa )

Art. 104. What is included in civil liability. — The civil liability established in
Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code includes:

1. Restitution;
2. Reparation of the damage caused;
3. Indemnification for consequential damages.

• First remedy granted by law is no. 1, in case this is not possible no. 2.
• In either case, no. 3 may be required

• Restitution – in theft, the culprit is duty bound to return the property stolen

• 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 cause would consist in the
payment of hospital bills and doctor’s fees to the offended party

• Indemnification – the lost of salary or earnings

CIVIL LIABILITIES PECUNIARY LIABILITIES
Includes reparation and indemnification Same
Includes restitution (return property taken), No restitution as the liabilities are to be paid out
nothing to pay in terms of money of the property of the offender
No fines and costs of proceedings Includes fines and costs of proceedings
Art. 105. Restitution. — How made. — The restitution of the thing itself must
be made whenever possible, with allowance for any deterioration, or
diminution of value as determined by the court.

The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession
of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter
his action against the proper person, who may be liable to him.

This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been
acquired by the third person in the manner and under the requirements
which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.

116
• The convict cannot by way of restitution, give to the offended party a similar thing of
the same amount, kind or species and quality. The very thing should be returned.

• If the property stolen while in the possession of the third party suffers deterioration due
to his fault, the court will assess the amount of the deterioration and, in addition to the
return of the property, the culprit will be ordered to pay such amount

• General Rule: the owner of the property illegally taken by the offender can recover it
from whomsoever is in possession thereof. Thus, even if the property stolen was
acquired by a 3rd person by purchase w/o knowing that it has been stolen, such
property will be returned to the owner.
Exception: purchased in a public sale or auction in good faith

Restitution or restoration presupposes that the offended party was divested of property, and
such property must be returned. If the property is in the hands of a third party, the same shall
nevertheless be taken away from him and restored to the offended party, even though such third
party may be a holder for value and a buyer in good faith of the property, except when such third
party buys the property from a public sale where the law protects the buyer.

• If the thing is acquired by a person knowing that it was stolen, then he is an accessory
and therefore criminally liable(liable under anti-fencing law)

• The third party who acquired the stolen property may be reimbursed w/ the price paid
therefor if it be acquired at (a) a public sale and (b) in good faith

• Circumstances which bar an action for recovery:

1. Torrens title
2. When sale is authorized

• When the liability to return a thing arises from a contract, not from a criminal act, the
court cannot order its return in the criminal case.

• Restitution may be ordered, even if accused is acquitted, provided the offense is

proved and it is shown that the thing belongs to someone else
The obligation of the offender transcends to his heirs, even if the offender dies, provided he died
after judgment became final, the heirs shall assume the burden of the civil liability, but this is only
to the extent that they inherit property from the deceased, if they do not inherit, they cannot inherit
the obligations.

• When crime is not against property, no restitution or reparation of the thing can be
done
Some believed that this civil liability is true only in crimes against property, this is not correct.
Regardless of the crime committed, if the property is illegally taken from the offended party during
the commission of the crime, the court may direct the offender to restore or restitute such property
to the offended party. It can only be done if the property is brought within the jurisdiction of that
court.

• The court has authority to order the reinstatement of the accused acquitted of a crime
punishable by the penalty of perpetual or temporary disqualification

If the property cannot be restituted anymore, then the damage must be repaired, requiring the
offender to pay the value thereof, as determined by the court. That value includes the sentimental
value to the offended party, not only the replacement cost. But if what would be restored is brand
new, then there will be an allowance for depreciation, otherwise, the offended party is allowed to
enrich himself at the expense of the offender.

Art. 106. Reparation. — How made. — The court shall determine the amount
of damage, taking into consideration the price of the thing, whenever
possible, and its special sentimental value to the injured party, and
reparation shall be made accordingly. Notes:

117
• Reparation will be ordered by the court if restitution is not possible

• Reparation shall be
a) the price of the thing

b) its sentimental value

In case of human life, reparation of the damage cause is basically P50,000.00 value of human life,
exclusive of other forms of damages. This P50,000.00 may also increase whether such life was
lost through intentional felony or criminal negligence, whether the result of dolo or culpa. Also in
the crime of rape, the damages awarded to the offended woman is generally P50,000.00 for the
damage to her honor.Supreme Court ruled that even if the offended woman does not adduce
evidence or such damage, court can take judicial notice of the fact that if a woman was raped, she
inevitably suffers damages.

• If there is no evidence as to the value of the thing unrecovered, reparation cannot be

made

• Payment by the insurance company does not relive the offender of his obligation to
repair the damage caused

• The damages shall be limited to those caused by the crime

• Accused is liable for the damages caused as a result of the destruction of the property
after the crime was committed either because it was lost or destroyed by the accused
himself or that of any other person or as a result of any other cause or causes

Art. 107. Indemnification — What is included. — Indemnification for

consequential damages shall include not only those caused the injured
party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of
the crime.

• Indemnity refers to crimes against persons; reparation to crimes against property

Indemnification of consequential damages refers to the loss of earnings, loss of profits. This does
not refer only to consequential damages suffered by the offended party; this also includes
consequential damages to third party who also suffer because of the commission of the crime.

• Indemnity for medical services still unpaid may be recovered

• Contributory negligence on the part of the offended party reduces the civil liability of
the offender

• The civil liability may be increased only if it will not require an aggravation of the
decision in the criminal case on w/c it is based

• The amount of damages for death shall be at least 50,000, even though there may
have been mitigating circumstances.

• In addition:
1. payment for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased

2. if the deceased was obliged to give support, the recipient who is not an heir,
may demand support from the defendant

3. the spouse, illegitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the

deceased may demand for moral damages.

• Moral damages may be recovered in the ff:

118
 1. physical injuries

2. seduction, abduction, rape

3. adultery, concubinage

4. illegal or arbitrary detention

5. illegal search

6. libel, slander, defamation

7. malicious prosecution

• Exemplary damages may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or
more aggravating circumstances; cannot be recovered as a matter of right, the court
will decide whether they should be adjudicated.

Indemnification also includes the award of attorney’s fees. Private prosecutor is therefore
entitled to the award of attorney’s fees.

Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for damages, or

indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand the same —
Upon whom it devolves. — The obligation to make restoration or reparation
for damages and indemnification for consequential damages devolves upon
the heirs of the person liable.

The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification likewise

descends to the heirs of the person injured.

• The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if restoration is not possible and the
deceased left no property

• Civil liability is possible only when the offender dies after final judgement.
• If the death of the offender took place before any final judgement of conviction was
rendered against him, the action for restitution must necessarily be dismissed.

An action for damages by reason of wrongful death may be instituted by the heirs of the
deceased against the administrator or executor of the estate of the deceased offender. It cannot
be brought by the administrator of the victim’s estate.

Art. 109. Share of each person civilly liable. — If there are two or more persons
civilly liable for a felony, the courts shall determine the amount for which
each must respond.

In case of insolvency of the accomplices, the principal shall be subsidiarily liable for their
share of the indemnity and in case of the insolvency of the principal, the accomplices shall
be subsidiarily liable, jointly and severally liable, for the indemnity due from said principal

When there are several offenders, the court in the exercise of its discretion shall determine what
shall be the share of each offender depending upon the degree of participation – as principal,
accomplice or accessory. If within each class of offender, there are more of them, such as more
than one principal or more than one accomplice or accessory, the liability in each class of offender
shall be subsidiary. Anyone of them may be required to pay the civil liability pertaining to such
offender without prejudice to recovery from those whose share have been paid by another.

If all the principals are insolvent, the obligation shall devolve upon the accomplice(s) or
accessory(s). But whoever pays shall have the right of recovering the share of the obligation from

119
those who did not pay but are civilly liable. In case the accomplice and the principal cannot pay,
the liability of those subsidiarily liable is absolute.

To relate with Article 38, when there is an order or preference of pecuniary (monetary) liability,
therefore, restitution is not included here.

There is not subsidiary penalty for non-payment of civil liability.

The owners of taverns, inns, motels, hotels, where the crime is committed within their establishment
due to noncompliance with general police regulations, if the offender who is primarily liable cannot
pay, the proprietor, or owner is subsidiarily liable.

Felonies committed by employees, pupils, servants in the course of their employment, schooling
or household chores. The employer, master, teacher is subsidiarily liable civilly, while the offender
is primarily liable.

Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of principals, accomplices and

accessories of a felony — Preference in payment. — Notwithstanding the
provisions of the next preceding article, the principals, accomplices, and
accessories, each within their respective class, shall be liable severally (in
solidum) among themselves for their quotas, and subsidiaries for those of
the other persons liable.

The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the property of the
principals; next, against that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of
the accessories.

Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been

enforced, the person by whom payment has been made shall have a right of
action against the others for the amount of their respective shares.

• Subsidiary liability will be enforced on:

1. first, against the property of the principal

2. second, against that of the accomplice

3. third, against that of the accessories

Illustration: Two principals, two accomplices and two accessories were convicted in a
homicide case, and the indemnity to the heirs of the victim was fixed at Php6,000.00. The quota
of the principals was fixed at Php3,000.00; the accomplices at Php2,000.00 and the accessories at
Php1,000.00 and as between themselves, the liability of each was ½. If both principals were
insolvent, their quota would be borne by the two accomplices whose liability would be
Php2,500.00 each for a total of Php5,000.00, the quota of both principals and accomplices. If the
accessories were insolvent, the principals would bear their quota. Subsidiarily and in default of
the principals, the accomplices would bear the quota of the accessories.

Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. — Any person who has
participated gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make
restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of such participation.

Notes:
1. This refers to a person who has participated gratuitously in the commission of a felony
and he is bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of such
participation

2. The third person must be innocent of the commission of the crime otherwise he would
be liable as an accessory and this article will not apply

120
Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. — Civil liability established in
Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code shall be extinguished in the same
manner as obligations, in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Law.

• Civil liability is extinguished by:

1. payment or performance
2. loss of the thing due
3. condonation or remission of the debt
4. confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and debtor
5. compensation
6. novation

• Other causes of extinguishment of obligations: annulment, rescission, fulfillment of a

resolutory condition and prescription .

• Civil liability may arise from

1. Crime - RPC
2. Breach of contract - CC
3. Tortious act – CC

• The civil liability from any of these is extinguished by the same causes enumerated
above

• The accused shall still be liable for the payment of the thing stolen even if it is lost or
destroyed
Civil liability of the offender is extinguished in the same manner as civil obligation is extinguished
but this is not absolutely true. Under civil law, a civil obligation is extinguished upon loss of the
thing due when the thing involved is specific. This is not a ground applicable to extinction of civil
liability in criminal case if the thing due is lost, the offender shall repair the damages caused.

The judgment for civil liability prescribes in ten years. It may be enforced by writ of
execution within the first five years and by action for revival of judgment during the next five
years. Insolvency is not a defense to an action to enforce judgment.

Art. 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. — Except in case of extinction of

his civil liability as provided in the next preceding article the offender shall
continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from the crime
committed by him, notwithstanding the fact that he has served his sentence
consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not been required
to serve the same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence
or any other reason.

Notes:
• Unless extinguished, civil liability subsists even if the offender has served sentence
consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights or has served the same, due to
amnesty, pardon, commutation of the sentence or any other reason.

• Under the law as amended, even if the subsidiary imprisonment is served for
nonpayment of fines, this pecuniary liability of the defendant is not extinguished.

• While amnesty wipes out all traces and vestiges of the crime, it does not extinguish
the civil liability of the offender. A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the
payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence

• Probation affects only the criminal aspect of the crime.

121