CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 1

Criminal law Brach or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment

Crime An act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it

Sources:1. RPC and its amendments2. Special Penal Laws3. PPs

No Common Law Unless there be a particular provision in the penal code or special penal laws that defines and punishes the act, even if it be socially or morally wrong, no criminal liability is incurred by its commission.

Court Decisions Not sources of criminal law, because they merely explain the meaning of, and apply, the law as enacted by the legislative branch of the government.

State Power to define and punish crime

Limitations on the Power of the Law Making Body to enact Penal Legislation1. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law

Rights of the Accused which may be Waived The right of the accused to confrontation and cross-examination These rights are personal to the accused

Rights which may Not Be Waived The right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. These rights involve public interest which may be affected.

Characteristics of Criminal Law1. General2. Territorial3. Prospective

GENERAL Criminal law is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in Philippine territory As a GR, the jurisdiction of the civil courts is not affected by the military character of the accused Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with general courts-martial over soldiers of the AFP Even in times of war, the civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the military courts or general courts-martial over soldiers of the AFP, provided that in the place of the commission of the crime no hostilities are in progress and civil courts are functioning. The RPC or other penal law is not applicable when the military court takes cognizance of the case The prosecution of an accused before a court-martial is a bar to another prosecution of the accused for the same offense

EXP to the General AppRPC, Art. 2:1. Treaties2. Laws of Preferential ApplicationArt. 14, NCC:1. Principles of Public International Law2. Treaty Stipulations

PERSONS Exempt from the operation of our Criminal Laws by Virtue of the Principles of PIL1. Sovereigns and other chiefs of state2. Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary, ministers resident, and charges daffaires

A Consul is not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or minister

TERRITORIAL as a rule, penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable only within its territory said code shall be enforced within the Philippine archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone

EXPs to the Territorial Application of Criminal LawArt. 2, RPC:1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligations and securities issued by the government of the Philippines;3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines 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; or5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations

PROSPECTIVE A penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when committed Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the time of their commission

EXPs To The Prospective Application of Criminal Laws Whenever a new statute dealing with crime establishes conditions more lenient or favourable to the accused, it can be given a retroactive effect.

But the EXP has NO Application:1. Where the new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing causes of action.2. Where the offender is a habitual criminal

When the new law and the old law penalize the same offense, the offender can be tried under the old law When the repealing law fails to penalize the offense under the old law, the accused cannot be convicted under the new law A person erroneously accused and convicted under a repealed statute may be punished under the repealing statue

ARTICLE 1This Code shall take effect on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-two.

The RPC is based mainly on principles of Classical School.

Two Theories in Criminal Law:1. Classical Theory2. Positivist Theory

CLASSICAL THEORY The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of the penalty is retribution It has endeavoured to establish a mechanical and direct proportion between crime and penalty.

POSITIVIST THEORY That man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon which constrains him to do wrong, in spite of or contrary to his volition.

ARTICLE 2Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced 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 Philippines or obligations and securities issued by the government of the Philippines;3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines 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; or5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations.

The provisions of the RPC shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, but also outside of its jurisdiction in certain cases.

(1) When the offender Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship Any person who committed a crime on board a Philippine Ship or airship while the same is outside of the Philippine territory can be tried before our civil courts for violation of the RPC But when the Philippine vessel or aircraft is in the territory of a foreign country, the crime committed on said vessel or aircraft is subject to the laws of that foreign country. It is the registration of the vessel or aircraft in accordance with the laws of the Philippines, not the citizenship of its owner, which makes it a Philippine ship or airship.

(2) Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligations and securities issued by the government of the Philippines;

(3) Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding number

(4) When the offender, while being a public officer or employee, should commit an offense in the exercise of his functions

Direct Bribery Indirect Bribery Fraud against the Public Treasury Possession of prohibited interest Malversation of Public Funds or Property Failure of accountable officer to render accounts Illegal Use of Public Funds or Property Failure to make delivery of public funds or property Falsification by a public officer or employee committed with abuse of his official position

(5) When the offender should commit any of the crimes against the national security and the law of nations. Treason Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason Espionage Inciting to war and giving motives for reprisals Violation of neutrality Correspondence with Hostile Country Flight to enemys country Piracy and Mutiny on the high seas The crimes punishable in the Philippines under Art. 2 are cognizable by the RTC in which the charge is filed. An offense committed on the high seas on board a foreign merchant vessel is not triable by our courts But offense committed on board a foreign merchant vessel while on Philippine waters is triable before our courtsRules as to Jurisdiction over crimes committed Aboard Foreign Merchant Vessels1. 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. Philippines follows the English Rule

Mere possession of opium aboard a foreign merchant vessel in transit is not triable in Philippine Courts, because that fact alone does not constitute a breach of public order.

When the foreign merchant vessel is not in transit because the Philippines is its terminal port, the person in possession of opium on board that vessel is liable, because he may be held guilty of illegal importation of opium.

Philippine courts have no jurisdiction over offenses committed on board foreign warships in territorial waters.

ARTICLE 3Acts 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 act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

Elements of Felonies1. That there must be an act or omission.2. That the act or omission must be punishable by the RPC3. That the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa.

Act Overt act or external act

Omission Inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty which one is bound to do. There must be a law requiring the doing or performance of an act. But there is no law that punishes a person who does not report to the authorities the commission of a crime which he witnessed, the omission to do so is not a felony.

Punished by law. Should be understood to mean punished by the RPC and not by a special law. Crime and offense are applied to infractions of the law punished by special statutes

Classifications of Felonies1. Intentional Felonies The act or omission of the offender is malicious Has the intention to cause an injury to another

2. Culpable Felonies The act or omission is not malicious The injury caused by the offender to another person is unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act performed without malice The wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill. A person who caused an injury, without intention to cause an evil, may be held liable for culpable felony.

Imprudence Indicates, deficiency in action If a person fails to take the necessary precaution to avoid injury to person or damage to property, there is imprudence. Imprudence usually involves lack of skill.

Negligence Indicates, deficiency in perception If a person fails to pay proper attention and to use due diligence in foreseeing the injury or damage impending to be caused, there is negligence. Negligence usually involves lack of foresight.

In felonies committed by means of dolo or with malice and in felonies committed by means of fault or culpa, the acts or omissions are voluntary. A criminal act is presume to be voluntary. Fact prevails over assumption, and in the absence of indubitable explanation, the act must be declared voluntary and punishable. (Criminal Minds) When there is compulsion or prevention by force or intimidation, there is no voluntariness in the act.

REQUISITES OF DOLO OR MALICE(all must be present)1. Freedom2. Intelligence3. Intent

FREEDOM When a person acts without freedom, he is no longer a human being but a tool; his liability is as much as that of the knife that wounds, or of the torch that sets fire, or of the key that opens a door, or of the ladder that is placed against the wall of a house in committing robbery Examples:a. A person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, exempt from criminal liability.b. A person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury is exempt from criminal liability.

INTELLIGENCE To determine the morality of human acts

INTENT Intent to commit the act with malice, being purely a mental process, is presumed and the presumption arises from the proof of the commission of an unlawful act. Intent presupposes the exercise of freedom and the use of intelligence Criminal intent and the will to commit a crime are always presumed to exist on the part of the person who executes an act which the law punishes, unless the contrary shall appear. But the presumption of criminal intent does not arise from the proof of the commission of an act which is not unlawful. The presumption of criminal intent from the commission of an unlawful act may be rebutted by proof of lack of such intent. When the accused is charged with intentional felony, absence of criminal intent is a defense.

MISTAKE OF FACT No Criminal Liability A misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another. He is not, however, criminally liable, because he did not act with criminal intent. An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption of criminal intent which arises upon the commission of a felonious act.

Requisites of Mistake of Fact as a Defense:1. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be.2. That the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful.3. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.

The mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused. Lack of intent to kill the deceased, because his intention was to kill another, does not relieve the accused from criminal responsibility In mistake of fact the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful. Thus in error in personae or mistake in the identity of the victim, the principle of mistake of fact does not apply. Mistake in the identity of the intended victim is not reckless imprudence No crime of resistance when there is a mistake of fact. When the accused is negligent, mistake of fact is not a defense.

In mistake of fact, the act done by the accused would have constituted,(1) A justifying circumstance under Art. 11(2) An absolutory cause under Art. 247, par. 2.(3) An involuntary act In apprehending event the most notorious criminal, the law does not permit the captor to kill him. It is only when the fugitive from justice is determined to fight the officers of the law who are trying to capture him that killing him would be justified.

REQUISITES OF FAULT OR CULPA1. Freedom2. Intelligence3. Imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

In felonies committed by means of culpa, the mind of the accused is not criminal. However, his act is wrongful, because the injury or damage caused to the injured party results from the imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill of the accused. In culpable felonies, the injury caused to another should be unintentional, it being simply the incident of another performed without malice. A person causing damage or injury to another, without malice or fault, is not criminally liable under the RPC. Provided, that the act performed must be lawful.

Case Note:People vs GuillenIn throwing the hand grenade at the President with the intention of killing him, the appellant acted with malice. He is therefore liable for all the consequences of his wrongful act; for in accordance with Art. 4 of the RPC, criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. In criminal negligence, the injury caused to another should be unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act performed without malice.

In order that an act may be qualified as imprudence it is necessary that neither malice nor intention to cause injury should intervene; where such intention exists, the act should be qualified by the felony it has produced even though it may not have been the intention of the actor to cause an evil of such gravity as that produced.

Deliberate intent to do an unlawful act is essentially inconsistent with the idea of reckless imprudence.

CRIMES PUNISHED BY SPECIAL LAWS Dolo is not required in crimes punished by special law (municipal or city ordinances) It is sufficient that the offender has the intent to perpetrate the act prohibited by the special law. Mala in se and Mala Prohibita No intent to perpetrate the act prohibited, no criminal liability. In those crimes punished by special laws, the act alone, irrespective of its motives, constitutes the offense. Good faith and absence of criminal intent not valid defenses in crimes punished by special laws.

INTENT VS MOTIVEMotive Is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite results. It is essential only when there is doubt as to the identity of the assailant (UNSUB or Unknown Subject)

Intent Is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such result

ARTICLE 4Criminal Liability shall be incurred:1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.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.

PRINCIPLE:El que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado or He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused.

One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or intended or not. One is not relieved from criminal liability for the natural consequences of ones illegal acts, merely because one does not intend to produce such consequences.

Kinds:1. Aberratio Ictus2. Praeter Intentionem3. Error in personae

When a person has not committed a felony, he is not criminally liable for the result which is not intended.

Although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.1. Mistake in the Identity of the Victim (Error in Personae)2. Mistake in the Blow, that is, when the offender intending to do an injury to one person actually inflicts it on another (Aberratio Ictus)3. The act exceeds the intent, that is, the injurious result is greater than that intended. (Praeter Intentionem)

Requisites for Prater Intentionem:1. That an intentional felony has been committed; and2. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural and logical consequence of the felony committed by the offender.

No felony is committed (1) when the act or omission is not punishable by the RPC, or (2) when the act is covered by any of the justifying circumstances enumerated in Art. 11, RPC. Any person who creates in anothers mind an immediate sense of danger, which causes the latter to do something resulting in the latters injuries, is liable for the resulting injuries. The felony committed must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury.

Proximate Cause That cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred. There must be a relation of cause and effect The cause and effect relationship is not altered or changed because of the pre-existing conditions, such as the pathological condition of the victim, the predisposition of the offended party, or the concomitant or concurrent conditions, or the conditions supervening the felonies act such as tetanus, pulmonary infection or gangrene. Requisites, not the proximate cause:a) There is an active force that intervened between the felony committed and the resulting injury, and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused; orb) The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim

When Death is presumed to be the natural consequence of the Physical Injuries inflictedWhen the following facts are established:1. That the victim at the time the physical injuries were inflicted was in normal health.2. That death may be expected from the physical injuries inflicted.3. That death ensued within a reasonable time.

If the consequences produced have resulted from a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the criminal act, the offender is not responsible for such consequences.

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME:Requisites:1. That the act performed would be an offense against persons or property2. That the act was done with evil intent3. That its accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that the means employed is either adequate or ineffectual ( a. Legal impossibility or b. Physical impossibility)4. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the RPC

In committing an impossible crime, the offender intends to commit a felony against persons or a felony against property, and the act performed would have been an offense against persons or property. But a felony against persons or property should not be actually committed, for, otherwise, he would be liable for that felony. There would be no impossible crime to speak of. In Impossible crime the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the Code.

Purpose of the law in punishing the Impossible Crime: To suppress criminal propensity or criminal tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.

ARTICLE 6Consummated felonies, as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.

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 product 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 acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.

Development of CrimeStages:1. Internal acts Mere ideas in the mind of a person, are not punishable even if, had they been carried out, they would constitute a crime.2. External acts (a) preparatory acts and (b) acts of execution

Acts of ExecutionStages1. Attempted2. Frustrated3. Consummated

ATTEMPTED FELONYElements of Attempted Felony1. The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts.Comment by servs: There must be an external act;Such external acts have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed.2. He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony;3. The offenders act is not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance;4. The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause or accident other than his spontaneous desistance.

Drawing or trying to draw a pistol is not an overt act of homicide. Raising a bolo as if to strike the offended party with it is not an over act of homicide. The external acts must have a direct connection with the crime intended to be committed by the offender. The desistance should be made before all the acts of execution are performed. The desistance which exempts from criminal liability has reference to the crime intended to be committed, and has no reference to the crime actually committed by the offender before his desistance In attempted felony, the offender never passes the subjective phase.

Indeterminate Offense It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain. Its nature in relation to its objective is ambiguous. The intention of the accused must be viewed from the nature of the acts executed by him, and not from his admission.

Subjective Phase It is that portion of the acts constituting the crime, starting from the point where the offender begins the commission of the crime to that point where he has still control over his acts, including their natural course.

If between these two points the offender is stopped by any cause outside of his own voluntary desistance, the subjective phase has not been passed and it is an attempt. If he is not so stopped but continues until he performs the last act, it is frustrated, provided the crime is not produced. The acts then of the offender reached the objective phase of the crime.

FRUSTRATED FELONYElements of Frustrated Felony1. The offender performs all the acts of execution;2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence;3. But the felony is not produced;4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

The belief of the accused need not be considered. What should be considered is whether all the acts of execution performed by the offender would produce the felony as a consequence. In crimes against persons, which requires the victims death to consummate the felony, it is necessary for the frustration of the same that a mortal wound be inflicted, because then the wound could produce the felony as a consequence.

CONSUMMATED FELONY When all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present.

How to determine whether the crime is only attempted or frustrated or it is consummated1. The nature of the offense2. The elements constituting the felony3. The manner of committing the same, must be considered.

Nature of the CrimeArson It is not necessary that the property is totally destroyed by fire. The crime of arson is therefore, consummated even if only a portion of the wall or any other part of the house is burned. If there was a blaze, but no part of the house is burned, the crime of arson is frustrated. If any part of the house, no matter how small, is burned, the crime of arson is consummated.

Elements Constituting the FelonyTheftComment by servs: Review this Part, pages 113-115, Reyes The crime is consummated when the thief is able to take or get hold of the thing belonging to another, even if he is not able to carry it away. Actula taking with intent to gain of personal property, belonging to another, without the latters consent, is sufficient to constitute consummated theft. It is not necessary that the offender carries away or appropriates the property taken

Estafa The crime is consummated when the offended party is actually damaged or prejudiced.

Manner of Committing the crime.1. Formal Crimes Consummated in one instant, no attempt. Ex. Slander, False Testimony, Sale of Marijuana and other Prohibited Drugs

2. Crimes Consummated by mere attempt or proposal or by overt act Flight to Enemys Country Corruption of Minors

3. Felony by omission No attempted stage because in this kind of felony the offender does not execute acts. He omits to perform an act which the law requires him to do.

4. Crimes requiring the intervention of two persons to commit them are consummated by mere agreement Betting in Sport Contests and Corruption of Public Officer

5. Material Crimes Three Stages of ExecutionThere is no attempted or frustrated Impossible Crime In impossible crime, the person intending to commit an offense has already performed the acts for the execution of the same, but nevertheless the crime is not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended is by its nature one of impossible accomplishment or because the means employed by such person are essentially inadequate or ineffectual to produce the result desired by him.

ARTICLE 7Light Felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated, with the exception of those committed against persons or property.

Light Felonies Are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, is provided.

ARTICLE 8Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.

A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.

There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

Conspiracy Exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Generally, conspiracy is not a crime except when the law specifically provides a penalty therefor as in treason, rebellion, and sedition. An agreement to commit a crime is a reprehensible act from the viewpoint of morality, but as long as the conspirators do not perform overt acts in furtherance of their malevolent design, the sovereignty of the State is not outraged and the tranquillity of the public remains undisturbed. The conspirators should not actually commit treason coup detat, rebellion or sedition. It is sufficient that two or more persons agree and decide to commit treason, rebellion or sedition. If they commit, say , treason, they will be held liable for treason, and the conspiracy which they had before committing treason is only a manner of incurring criminal liability. It is not a separate offense.

Conspiracy as a felony, distinguished from conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability. Comment by servs: See Page 124, Reyes

Indications of Conspiracy When the defendants by their acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and the other performing another part so as to complete it, with a view to the attainment of the same object, and their acts, though apparently independent, were in fact concerted and cooperative, indicating closeness of personal association, concerted action and concurrence of sentiments, the court will be justified in concluding that said defendants were engaged in a conspiracy. Unity of Purpose Unity in the Execution of the Unlawful Acts

For a collective responsibility among the accused to be established, it is sufficient that at the time of the aggression, all of them acted in concert, each doing his part to fulfil their common design to kill their victim, and although only one of them may have actually stabbed the victim, the act of that one is deemed to be the act of all.

The Acts of the Defendants must show a Common Design

Period of Time to afford opportunity for Meditation and Reflection, not required in Conspiracy

REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY:1. That two or more persons came to an agreement;2. That the agreement concerned the commission of a felony; and3. That the execution of the felony be decided upon.

First Element That two or more persons came to an agreement Agreement presupposes meeting of the minds of two or more persons

Second Element - That the agreement concerned the commission of a felony The agreement refers to the commission of a crime. It must be an agreement to act, to effect, to bring about what has already been conceived and determined.

Third Element - That the execution of the felony be decided upon The conspirators have made up their minds to commit the crime. There must be a determination to commit the crime of treason, rebellion or sedition.

Direct Proof is Not Essential to establish Conspiracy it may be inferred from the collective acts of the accused before, during and after the commission of the crime. Conspiracy can be presumed from and proven by acts of the accused themselves when the said acts point to a joint purpose and design, concerted action and community of interests It is not necessary to show that all the conspirators actually hit and killed the victim. Conspiracy renders all the conspirators as Co-Principals regardless of the extent and character of their participation because in contemplation of law, the act of one conspirator is the act of all.

REQUISITES OF PROPOSAL:1. That a person has decided to commit a felony; and2. That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

There is No Criminal Proposal when 1. The person who proposes is not determined to commit the felony2. There is no decided, concrete and formal proposal3. It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed Note that what constitutes the felony of proposal to commit treason or rebellion is the making of proposal. The law does not require that the proposal be accepted by the person to whom the proposal is made. If it is accepted, it may be conspiracy to commit treason or rebellion, because there would be an agreement and a decision to commit it.

ARTICLE 9Grave Felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Article 25 of this Code.

Less Grace 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 the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, is provided.

ARTICLE 10Offenses 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.

The Circumstances Affecting Criminal Liability are:1. Justifying Circumstances (Art. 11)2. Exempting Circumstances (Art. 12, and other Absolutory Circumstances (Arts. 20, Art. 124, last par., Art. 280, last par., Art. 332, Art. 344, etc.)3. Mitigating Circumstances (Art. 13)4. Aggravating Circumstances (Art. 14)5. Alternative Circumstances (Art. 15)

IMPUTABILITY The quality by which an act may be ascribed to a person as its author or owner. It implies that the act committed has been freely and consciously done and may, therefore, be put down to the doer as his very own.

RESPONSIBILITY The obligation of suffering the consequences of crime. It is the obligation of taking the penal and civil consequences of the crime. While imputability implies that a deed may be imputed to a person, responsibility implies that the person must take the consequence of such a deed.

GUILT An element of responsibility, for a man cannot be made to answer for the consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES Those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law, so that such person is deemed not have transgressed the law and is free from both criminal and civil liability. There is no civil liability, except in par. 4 of Art. 11, where the civil liability is borne by the persons benefited by the act.

ARTICLE 11The following do not incur any criminal liability:1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur:

First. Unlawful Aggression;Second. Reasonable Necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;Third. Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person pr rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees, and those by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present, and the further requisite, in case the provocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making defense had no part therein.

3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this article are present and that the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil motive.

4. 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: (THE AVENGERS ARTICLE or THE HERO ARTICLE)

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.

5. Any person who acts in the fulfilment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.

6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose. (BLACKHAWK DOWN ARTICLE)

ARTCILE 12The following are exempt from criminal liability:1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval.

When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same court.

2. A person under 15 years of age. (RA 9344)3. A person over 15 years of age and under 18, unless he has acted with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of this Code.

When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in conformity with the provisions of this and the preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and custody of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and education; otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said Article 80. (Impliedly repealed by Ra 9344)

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.5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force.6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrolled fear of an equal or greater injury.7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause.

ARTICLE 13The following are mitigating circumstances;1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant.2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80.3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act.5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation.7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or tha the had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution;8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or communications with his fellow beings.

9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-power of the offender without however depriving him of the consciousness of his acts.10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature and analogous to those above mentioned.

ARTICLE 14The following are aggravating circumstances;1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public authorities.3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness.5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship.6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense.Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band.

7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity.9. That the accused is a recidivist. A recidivist is 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 this Code.10. That the offender has been previously punished by 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.11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or promise.12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation.14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense.16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tenddirectly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.19. That as means to commission of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions.

ARTICLE 15Alternative 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 degree of the offender.

The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration as a mitigating circumstance when the offender is 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.

The Alternative Circumstances are:1. Relationship2. Intoxication3. Degree of instruction and education of the offender.

RelationshipWhen the offended party is the (a) Spouse(b) Ascendant(c) Descendant(d) Legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or(e) Relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender.

The relationship of stepfather or stepmother and stepson or stepdaughter is included by analogy as similar to that of ascendant and descendant. The relationship of adopted parent and adopted child may also be included, as similar to that of ascendant and descendant.

When mitigating and when aggravating Mitigating: Crimes against property Robbery Usurpation Fraudulent insolvency Arson Trespass to dwellingNo Criminal Liability, Only Civil Liability Theft Swindling Malicious Mischief

Aggravating Crimes against Persons, in cases where the offended party is a relative of a higher degree than the offender, or when the offender and the offended party are relatives of the same level, as killing a brother, a brother-in-law, a half-brother or adopted brother. In crime of Chastity, relationship is always aggravating. If the crime against persons is any of the serious physical injuries, the fact that the offended party is a descendant of the offender is not mitigating, If the offense of serious physical injuries is committed by the offender against his child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his legitimate other descendants, relationship or aggravating. But the serious physical injuries must not be inflicted by a parent upon his child by excessive chastisement.

When the crime is less serious physical injuries, or slight physical injuries, relationship is a mitigating circumstance, if the offended party is a relative of a lower degree of the offender; and aggravating circumstance, if the offended party is a relative of a higher degree of the offender.

When the crime against persons is homicide or murder, relationship is aggravating even if the victim of the crime is a relative of lower degree.

Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating, when relationship is an element of the offense.

IntoxicationWhen mitigating and when aggravating Mitigating:(1) If intoxication is not habitual, or(2) If intoxication is not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony.

Aggravating:(1) If intoxication is habitual; or(2) If it is intentional (subsequent to the plan to commit a felony)

It is intentional when the offender drinks liquor fully knowing its effects, to find in the liquor a stimulant to commit a crime or a means to suffocate any remorse.

The accuseds state of intoxication must be proved.

Drunkenness must affect mental faculties.

Intoxication is mitigating where the same was not habitual nor intentional and the crime was not the offspring of planning and deliberation but a fatal improvisation dictated by an impromptu impulse.

Presumption is that intoxication is accidental.

Non-habitual intoxication, lack of instruction and obfuscation are not to be taken separately. The SC considered them as one mitigating circumstance only and modified the penalty imposed by the trial court by raising it and imposing the proper penalty in the minimum period.

Degree of Instruction and Education of the Offender Low degree of instruction and education or lack of it is generally mitigating. High degree of instruction and education is aggravating, when the offender avails himself of his learning in committing the crime. Lack of sufficient intelligence is required in illiteracy. Not illiteracy alone but also lack of sufficient intelligence are necessary to invoke the benefit of the alternative circumstance of lack of instruction, the determination of which is left to the trial court. The question of lack of instruction cannot be raised for the first time in appellate court. Degree of instruction is aggravating when the offender availed himself or took advantage of it in committing the crime.

GR: Low degree or lack of instruction is mitigating in all Crimes.

EXPS:1. Crimes against property; estafa, theft, robbery, arson.2. Robbery with homicide.3. Crimes against Chastity, rape and adultery4. Treason5. Murder

ARTICLE 16The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies:1. Principals2. Accomplices3. Accessories

The following are criminally liable for light offense:1. Principals2. Accomplices

Rules relative to Light Felonies:1. Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated.2. But when light felonies are committed against persons or property, they are punishable even if they are only in the attempted or frustrated stage of execution.3. Only principals and accomplices are liable for light felonies.4. Accessories are not liable for light felonies, even if they are committed against persons or property.

ARTICLE 17The 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.

But when two or more persons are involved in killing another, it is necessary to determine the participation of each.

The difference between an accused who is a principal under any of the three categories enumerated in Art. 17 of the RPC and a co-conspirator who is also a principal is that while the formers criminal liability is limited to his own acts, as a general rule, the latters responsibility includes the acts of his fellow conspirators.

Par. 1 PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION Personally takes part in the execution of the act committing the crime. It is the one personally committing the crime in obedience to that order or because of the inducement, who is the principal by direct participation

Two or More Offenders as Principals By Direct ParticipationRequisites:1. That they participated in the criminal resolutions.2. That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly tended the same end.

First Requisite Participation in the Criminal Resolutions When they were in Conspiracy at the time of the commission of the crime It is well-settled that a person may be convicted for the criminal act of another where, between them, there has been conspiracy or unity of purpose and intention in the commission of the crime charged.

Conspiracy It exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. The conspiracy contemplated in the first requisite is not a felony, but only a manner of incurring criminal liability. To be a party to a conspiracy, one must have the intention to participate in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose. He must perform an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, either by actively participating in the actual commission of the crime, or lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of the crime , or by exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy. Mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval of the act without cooperation or agreement to cooperate is not enough to constitute one a party to a conspiracy, but that there must be intentional participation in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose. Conspiracy transcends companionship.

Existence of Conspiracy It does not require an agreement for an appreciable length of time prior to the execution of its purpose. It exists if, at the time of the commission of the offense, the accused had the same purpose and were united in its execution.

Conspiracy arises on the very instant the plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the felony and forthwith decide to pursue it. Once this assent is established, each and everyone of the conspirators is made criminally liable for the crime actually committed by anyone of them.

Formal agreement or precious acquaintance among several persons not necessary in conspiracy. It is sufficient that at the time of the aggression, all the accused manifested by their acts a common intent or desire to attack so that the act of one accused becomes the act of all.

Conspiracy must be established by positive and conclusive evidence. Proof beyond reasonable doubt

When there is no conspiracy, each of the offenders is liable only for the act performed by him.

Participation in Criminal Resolutions The cooperation which the law punishes is the assistance which is knowingly or intentionally given and which is not possible without previous knowledge of the criminal purpose.

Unity of purpose and intention in the commission of the crime is shown in the following cases:a. Spontaneous agreement at the moment of the commission of the crime is sufficient to create joint responsibilityb. Active cooperation by all the offenders in the perpetration of the crime will also create joint responsibilityc. Contributing by positive acts to the realization of a common criminal intent also creates joint responsilibility.d. Presence during the commission of the crime by a band and lending moral support thereto, also create joint responsibility with the material executors.e. Where one of the accused knew of the plan of the others to kill the two victims and he accepted the role assigned to him, which was to shoot one of the victims, and he actually performed that role, he is a co-principal by direct-participation in the double murder.

There may be conspiracy even if there is no evident premeditation on the part of the accused.

Liability of Participants where there is conspiracy The act of one is the act of all. Where conspiracy has been adequately proven, all the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and character of their participation because in contemplation of law, the act of one is the act of all. The degree of actual participation by each of the conspirators is immaterial. As conspirators, each is equally responsible for the acts of their co-conspirators. A conspirator should necessarily be liable for the acts of another conspirator even though such acts differ radically and substantially from that which they intended to commit. Where there is conspiracy to commit a felony, all the conspirators are liable for its consequences.

A conspirator is not liable for anothers crime which is not an object of the conspiracy or which is not a necessary and logical consequence thereof.

Conspiracy may cover persons previously undetermined. The accused are liable for all the natural and inherent consequences of such plan, it appearing that there was a general plan to kill anyone who might put up violent resistance.

A person in conspiracy with others, who had desisted before the crime was committed by the others, is not criminally liable.

When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary to ascertain the specific act of each conspirator. Conspiracy having been established, it is immaterial who of the conspirators fired the fatal shot. S

When there is conspiracy, the fact that an element of the offense is not present as regards one of the conspirators is immaterial.

GR: In multiple rape, each rapist is equally liable for the other rapes.EXPS:1. In the crime of parricide, the element of relationship must be present as regards all the offenders.2. In the crime of murder where treachery is an element of the crime, all the offenders must at least have knowledge of the employment of treachery at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein. The circumstances which consist int he material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein. Treachery is either a qualifying or a generic aggravating circumstance.

Participation in anothers criminal resolution must either precede or be coetaneous with the criminal act.

There could be no conspiracy to commit an offense through negligence.

In cases of criminal negligence or crimes punishable by special law, allowing or failing an act to be performed by another, makes one a co-principal.

Second Requisite (Principals by Direct Participation) The principals by direct participation must be at the scene of the crime, personally taking part in its execution. The acts of each offender must directly tend to the same end.

In a murder which the offenders previously agreed to commit, not only the one who inflicts the fatal wound is considered a principal, but also the one who holds down the victim and the one who lies in wait at the door to prevent any help from being rendered. The acts of each and every one of the offenders in this case are all directed to the same end, that is, the killing of their victim. Criminal responsibility in such a case is collective.

One serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is a principal by direct participation When the second requisite is lacking, there is only conspiracy.

Par. 2. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION The principal by induction becomes liable only when the principal by direct participation committed the act induced.

Two ways of becoming Principal By Induction:1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime, and2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime.

By directly forcingTwo ways of directly forcing another to commit a crime:a. By using irresistible forceb. By causing uncontrollable fear

By directly inducingTwo ways of directly inducing another to commit a crime:a. By giving price, or offering reward or promiseb. By using words of command

Requisites1. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime; and2. That such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material executor.

To constitute inducement, there must exist on the part of the inducer the most positive resolution and the most persistent effort to secure the commission of the crime, together with the presentation to the person induced of the very strongest kind of temptation to commit the crime.

A thoughtless expression without intention to produce the result is not an inducement to commit a crime. But a thoughtless expression or act, without any expectation or intention that it would produce the result, is not an inducement to commit a crime.

The words of advice or the influence must have actually moved the hands of the principal by direct participation.

It is necessary that the inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the principal by direct participation, that is, without such inducement the crime would not have been committed.

Inducement exists if the command or advice is of such a nature that, without its concurrence, the crime would not have materialized.

The inducement must precede the act induced and must be so influential in producing the criminal act that without it, the act would not have been performed. Thus, the price given to the principal by direct participation after the commission of the crime, without prior promise to give a price or reward, could not be an inducement.

If the person who actually committed the crime had a reason of his own to commit the crime, it cannot be said that the inducement was influential in producing the criminal act. In such case, the one charged with having induced the commission of the crime is not criminally liable.

By using words of Command Command must be the moving cause of the offense An imprudent utterance said in the excitement of the hour or in the beat of anger, and not, rather, in the nature of a command that had to be obeyed, does not make the utterer a principal by inducement.

In determining whether the utterances of an accused are sufficient to make him guilty as co-principal by inducement, it must appear that the inducement was of such nature and was made in such a way as to become the determining cause of the crime and that such inducement was uttered with the intention of producing the result.

The inciting words must have great dominance and influence over the person who acts; they ought to be direct and as efficacious or powerful as physical or moral coercion or violence itself.

Requisites(1) That the one uttering the words of command must have the intention of procuring the commission of the crime.(2) That the one who made the command must have an ascendancy or influence over the person who acted.(3) That the words used must be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful as to amount to physical or moral coercion.(4) The words of command must be uttered prior to the commission of the crime.(5) The material executor of the crime has no personal reason to commit the crime.

Requisites considered in determining the liability of a person accused as principal by inducement. The question whether a person present upon the occasion of a homicide but who takes no direct part in the act can be held criminally liable for inciting and encouraging another with expressions, such as, go ahead, hit him, there you have him, now is the time, etc., depends upon whether such words are spoken under conditions which give them a direct and determinative influence upon the mind of the principal actor.

Ascendancy of influence as to amount to moral coercion is not necessary when there is conspiracy.

One who planned the crime committed by another is a principal by inducement.If the crime committed is not contemplated in the order given, the inducement is not material and not the determining cause thereof.

Principal by Inducement vs Offender who made proposal to commit a felony1. In both, there is an inducement to commit a crime.2. In the first, the principal by inducement becomes liable only when the crime is committed by the principal by direct participation; In the second, the mere proposal to commit a felony is punishable in treason or rebellion. The person whom the proposal is made should not commit the crime; otherwise, the proponent becomes a principal by inducement.3. In the first, the inducement involves any crime; in the second, the proposal to be punishable must involve only treason or rebellion.

But if the one charged by as principal by direct participation is acquitted because he acted without criminal intent or malice, his acquittal is not a ground for the acquittal of the principal by inducement.

The reason for the rule is that in exempting circumstances, such as when the act is not voluntary because of lack of intent on the part of the accused, there is a crime committed, only that the accused is not a criminal. In intentional felonies, the act of a person does not make him criminal unless his mind be criminal.

Par. 3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATIONCooperate To desire or wish in common a thing. But that common will or purpose does not necessarily mean previous understanding, for it can be explained or inferred from the circumstances of each case.

Requisites:1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and intention immediately before the commission of the crime charged; and2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act, without which it would not have been accomplished. Otherwise, the offender is only an accomplice.

Cooperate...by another act. It should be different from the act of the principal by direct participation.

Liability of conspirators who took turns in raping a girl.

Collective criminal responsibility.Individual criminal responsibility.

ARTICLE 18Accomplices are the persons who, not being included in Article 17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.

The principal element of every punishable complicity consists in the concurrence of the will of the accomplice with the will of the author of the crime, and the accomplice cooperates by previous or simultaneous acts in the execution of the offense by the principal.

But the participation or cooperation of the accomplice is not any one of those mentioned in Article 17.

When there is no conspiracy between or among the defendants but they were animated by one and the same purpose to accomplish the criminal objective, those who cooperated by previous or simultaneous acts but cannot be held liable as principals are accomplices.

In case of doubt, the participation of the offender will be considered that of an accomplice rather than that of a principal.

When the participation of an accused is not disclosed, he is only an accomplice.

An accomplice does not enter into a conspiracy with the principal by direct participation. He does not have previous agreement or understanding with the principal to commit a crime. But he participates to a certain point in the common criminal design.

Accomplice vs ConspiratorThey have one thing in common, they know and agree with the criminal design.Conspirators, however, know the criminal intention because they themselves have decided upon such course of action. Accomplices come to know about it after the principals have reached the decision, and only then do they agree to cooperate in its execution.

Conspirators decide that a crime should be committed; Accomplices merely concur in it.

Conspirators are the authors of a crime; Accomplices are merely instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration of the offense.

It was held that if the overt acts of the accused, although done with knowledge of the criminal intent of his co-accused should be held liable only as an accomplice in the killing of the victim.

Requisites1. That there be community of design; that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose.2. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way; and3. That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the person charged as accomplice.

First RequisiteThe cooperation that the law punishes is the assistance knowingly or intentionally rendered, which cannot exist without previous cognizance of the criminal act intendeds to be executed by the principal by direct participation.

How an accomplice acquires knowledge of the criminal design of the principal?1. When the principal informs or tells the accomplice of the formers criminal purpose.2. When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of the principal.

No knowledge of the criminal design of the principal not an accomplice.

The community of design need not be to commit the crime actually committed. It is sufficient if there was a common purpose to commit a particular crime and that the crime actually committed was a natural or probable consequence of the intended crime.

The cooperation of an accomplice is not due to a conspiracy.

When the acts of the accused are not indispensable in the killing, they are merely accomplices.

The accomplice merely supplies the principal with material or moral aid without conspiracy with the latter.

The wounds inflicted by an accomplice in crime against persons should not have caused the death of the victim. Otherwise, he becomes a principal by direct participation.

Being present and giving moral support when a crime is being committed will make a person responsible only as accomplice in the crime committed.

The moral aid may be through advice, encouragement or agreement. But it should not be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the principal by direct participation; otherwise, the one who gave the advice or encouragement or the one who entered into the agreement would be a principal by inducement. When the accomplice gives an advice or encouragement to, or enters into an agreement with the principal, he knows the principal if going to commit the crime.

It is not enough that a person entertains an identical criminal design as that of the principal. There must be a relation between the criminal act of the principal by direct participation and that of the person charged as accomplice.

ARTICLE 19Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having participated therein, 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 discovery3. By harbouring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principal 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.

An accessory does not participate in the criminal design, nor cooperate in the commission of the felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of the crime, he subsequently takes part in three ways.

Important Words and Phrases1.) Having knowledge An accessory must have knowledge of the commission of the crime, and having that knowledge, he took part subsequent to its commission.

Mere possession of stolen property does not make the accused accessory where the thief was already convicted. If there has been no one convicted as thief, the possessor should be prosecuted as principal of the crime of theft.

Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been committed is not enough. Suspicion is the imagination of the existence of something without proof, or upon very slight evidence, or upon no evidence at all.

Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be acquired subsequent to the acquisition of stolen property. To declare the accused guilty as accessory, it is not necessary that he should have acquired the property, knowing at that time that it had been stolen. It is sufficient that after acquiring that knowledge, he concealed or disposed of the property, thereby depriving the owner thereof.

Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be established by circumstantial evidence.

2.) Commission of the crime3.) Without having participated therein either as principals or accomplices4.) Take part subsequent to its commission

Specific acts of Accessories1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime

The crime committed by the principal under this paragraph may be any crime, provided it is not a light felony. The accessory should not take the property without the consent of the principal. Otherwise, he is a principal in a crime of theft. Theft may be committed by taking with intent to gain, personal property from one who stole it, without the latters consent.

When is profiting by the effects of the crime punished as the act of principal, and not the act of accessory? When a person knowingly acquired or received property taken by the brigands.

Assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime. An accessory should not be in conspiracy with the principal.

2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime to prevent its discovery. The crime committed by the principal under this paragraph may be any crime, provided it is not a light felony. There must be an attempt to hide the body of the crime.

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

Two classes of Accessories are contemplated in Par. 3 of Art. 19.a. Public officers who harbour, conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of any crime (not light felony) with abuse of his official functions.Requisites:(1) The accessory is a public officer.(2) He harbours, conceals, or assists in the escape of the principal.(3) The public officer acts with abuse of his public functions.(4) The crime committed by the principal is any crime, provided it is not a light felony.

b. Private persons who harbour, conceal or assist in the escape of the author of the crime guilty of treason, parricide, murder or an attempt against the life of the President, or who is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime. Requisites:(1) The accessory is a private person.(2) He harbours, conceals or assists in the escape of the author of the crime.(3) The crime committed by the principal is either, treason, parricide, murder, an attempt against the life of the President, or that the principal is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.

But the accessory must have knowledge of the principal being habitually guilty of some other crime, because the law says or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.

A mayor who refused to prosecute offender is accessory.

One who kept silent with regard to the crime he witnessed is not an accessory.

The responsibility of the accessory is subordinate to that of the principal in a crime, because the accessorys participation therein is subsequent to its commission, and his guilt is directly related to that of the principal delinquent in the punishable act.

Conviction of an accessory is possible notwithstanding the acquittal of the principal, if the crime was in fact committed, but the principal was not held criminally liable, because of an exempting circumstance. In exempting circumstances, there is a crime committed. Hence, there is a basis for convicting the accessory.

Even if the principal is still unknown or at large, the accessory may be held responsible provided the requisites prescribed by law for the existence of the crime are present and that someone committed it.

The accused cannot be held liable as accessory, if the principal charged with murder died before trial, because had he been alive he might have been found guilty only of homicide.The arraignment, trial and conviction of an accessory after the fact without the principal of the crime having first been tried and convicted in the separate case filed and pending at the time of the arraignment, trial and decision of the case against the accessory, is not proper and violates the legal system of procedural orderliness.

For one to be found guilty and punished as an accessory, it is not necessary that there be a principal duly convicted. Neither the letter nor the spirit of the law requires that the principal be convicted before one may be punished as an accessory. As long as the corpus delicti is proved and the accessorys participation as such shown, he can be held criminally responsible and meted out the corresponding penalty.

An accessory does not participate in the criminal design, nor cooperate in the commission of the felony, but, with knowledge of the commission of the crime, he subsequently takes part in any of the three ways mentioned in Art. 19.

ARTICLE 20Accessories 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 single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.

Even if only two of the principals guilty of murder are the brothers of the accessory and the others are not related to him, such accessory is exempt from criminal liability.

Nephew or niece not included among such relatives.

Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even if the principal is related to him, if such accessory (1) profited by the effects of the crime, or (2) assisted the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

===========================================

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

Extinction of criminal liability does not necessarily mean that the civil liability is also extinguished.

Causes of extinction of criminal liability arise after the commission of the offense; while the causes of justification or exemption from criminal liability arise from circumstances existing either before the commission of the crime or at the moment of its commission.

That criminal liability is totally extinguished is a ground for motion to quash.

The death of the convict, whether before or after judgment, extinguishes criminal liability, because one of the juridical conditions of penalty is that it is personal.

Civil liability is extinguished only when death occurs before final judgment.

Criminal and civil liability is extinguished when the offender dies before final judgment.

When the accused died while the judgment of conviction against him was pending appeal, his civil and criminal liability was extinguished by his death.

Final Judgment Judgement in a criminal case becomes final after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal or when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served, or the defendant has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal.

Effect of the death of the accused pending appeal on his criminal and civil liabilityGR: -- Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based solely on the offense committed.

EXP: --

The claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of the accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict, such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-delicts.

If the private offended party, upon extinction, of the civil liability ex delicto, desires to recover damages from the same act or omission complained of, he must, file a separate civil action, this time predicated not on the felony previously charged but on other sources of obligation. The source of obligation against whom the same shall be enforced.

Right of offended party to file separate civil action not lost by prescription when accused dies pending appeal.

Death of the offended party does not extinguish the criminal liability of the accused.

Service of sentence does not extinguish the civil liability.

Amnesty It is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or a general pardon for a past offense, and is rarely, if ever, exercised in favour of a single individual, and is usually exerted in behalf of certain classes of persons, who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted.

Amnesty completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects.

Amnesty may be granted after conviction.

Civil liability not extinguished by amnesty.

Absolute PardonPardon It is an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed. Kinds: Absolute pardon Conditional pardon A pardon, whether absolute or conditional, is in the nature of a deed, for the validity of which delivery is an indispensable requisite. Until accepted, all that may have been done is a matter of intended favour and may be cancelled. But once accepted by the grantee, the pardon already delivered cannot be revoked by the authority which granted it.

Amnesty vs Pardon1. Pardon includes any crime and is exercised individually by the President; Amnesty is a blanket pardon to classes of persons or communities who may be guilty of political offenses.2. Pardon is exercised when the person is already convicted; Amnesty may be exercised even before trial or investigation is had.3. Pardon looks forward and relieves the offender from the consequences of which he had been convicted, that is, it abolishes or forgives the punishment, and for that reason it does not work the restoration of the rights to hold public office or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.

On the other hand, amnesty looks backward and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself; it so overlooks and obliterates the offense with which he is charged that the person released by amnesty stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense.

4. Both do not extinguish the civil liability of the offender. 5. Pardon, being a private act of the President, must be pleaded and proved by the person pardoned; while Amnesty being by Proclamation of the Chief Executive with the concurrence of Congress, is a public act of which the courts should take judicial notice.

PrescriptionBy prescription, the State or the People loses the right to prosecute the crime or demand the service of the penalty imposed.

Prescription of the crime Is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a certain time.

Prescription of the penalty Is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the Government to execute the final sentence after the lapse of a certain time.

Two conditions necessary in prescription of penalty(a) That there be final judgment(b) That the period of time prescribed by law for its enforcement has elapsed.

By the marriage of the offended womanMarriage of the offender with the offended woman after the commission of any of the crimes of rape, seduction, abduction or acts of lasciviousness, must be contracted by the offender in good faith. Hence, marriage contracted only to avoid criminal liability is devoid of legal effects.

ARTICLE 90Prescription of CrimesCrimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua pre 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 offenses 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 paragraph of this article.

In computing the period of prescription, the first day is to be excluded and the last day included.

Where the last day of the prescription period for filing an information falls on a Sunday or legal holiday, the information can no longer be filed on the next day as the crime has already prescribed.

As to the prescription of oral defamation and slander by deed, distinction should be made between simple and grave slander. Simple slander prescribes in two months.

Crimes punishable by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200 prescribe in two months.

The period of prescription of the offense of attempted bribery, penalized with destierro, is 10 years according to Article 90, for the reason that destierro is classified as a correctional penalty under Art. 25.

The crimes punishable by fines shall prescribe in 15 years, if the fine is afflictive; or in 10 years, if it is correctional; or in two months, if the fine is light. The subsidiary penalty for non-payment of the fine should not be considered in determining the period of prescription of such crimes.

When the penalty is a compound one, the highest penalty is the basis of the application of the rules in Art. 90.

When fine is an alternative penalty higher than the other penalty which is by imprisonment prescription of the crime is based on the fine.

Prescriptive periods of offenses punished under special laws and municipal ordinances.Act No. 3763, amending Act No. 3326, provides:1. Offenses punished only by a fine or by imprisonment for not more than one month, or both, prescribe after 1 year.2. Offenses punished by imprisonment, for more than one month, but less than two years after 4 years.3. Offenses punished by imprisonment for two years or more but less than six years after 8 years.4. Offenses punished by imprisonment for six years or more after 12 years.5. Offenses under Internal Revenue Law after 5 years.6. Violations of municipal ordinances after 2 months.7. Violations of the regulations or conditions of certificate of convenience by the Public Service Commission after 2 months.

Act No. 3326 is not applicable where the special law provides for its own prescriptive period.

Prescription of violations penalized by special laws and ordinances shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of the law, and if the same be not known at the time, from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment.

The prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the guilty person, and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not constituting jeopardy.

Defense of prescription may be raised during the trial or during the appeal.

The accused cannot be convicted of an offense lesser than that charged if the lesser offense had already prescribed at the time the information was filed.

Prescription does not divest court of jurisdiction; it is a ground for acquittal of the accused.

ARTICLE 91Computation 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 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.

Outline of the provisions:1. The period of prescription commences to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents.2. It is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information.3. It commences 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.4. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines.

ARTICLE 92When 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 yeasrs.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.

The penalties must be imposed by final sentence. Hence, if the convict appealed and thereafter fled to the mountains, the penalty imposed upon him would never prescribe, because pending the appeal, the sentence is not final.

In prescription of crimes, it is the penalty prescribed by law that should be considered; in prescription of penalties, it is the penalty imposed that should be considered.

ARTICLE 93Computation 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.

Outline of the provisions:1. The period of prescription of penalties commences to run from the date when the culprit evaded the service of his sentence.2. It is interrupted if the convict (1) Gives himself up,(2) Be captured,(3) Goes to a foreign country with which we have no extradition treaty, or(4) Commits another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.