Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)

Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW

In summary: Criminal laws shall be applied to a crime committed within the territory of
the Philippines (territoriality) by a person who is residing or sojourning in the Philippines
(generality) on or after the effectivity of the law (prospectivity).

Generality vs. Territoriality

Generality Territoriality
the accused is claiming criminal immunity the accused is claiming criminal immunity
and his argument is based on the unique and his argument is based on the unique
character of his person character of the place where the crime is
committed

General (Principle of Generality)

Q: Ray, an American foreigner, was caught in possession of loose firearms in

violation of R.A. No. 10591. Can Ray be charged and prosecuted before the
Philippine courts?
A: Yes. Applying the principle of generality, all penal laws, including R.A. No. 10591 on
illegal possession of loose firearms, shall be obligatory to all persons residing or
sojourning within the Philippines, regardless of his foreign characteristic.

Q: Mark, an American foreigner, violated the Trademark Law. The defense of Mark
is that he is a foreigner. Can Mark be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine
courts?
A: Yes. All penal laws, including the Law on Trademarks, is obligatory, even if he is an
American citizen, as long as he is residing or sojourning in the Philippine territory.

Note: In these two questions, both issues pertain to the principle of generality since both
the accused (Ray and Mark) are invoking the unique characteristic of their person.

Q: A consular agent rejected the application for visa and defamed the applicant.
Can the consular agent be charged before the Philippine courts?
A: Yes. A consular agent is not exempt from the application of the Philippine criminal
laws. It is not his function to defame an applicant.

Q: While driving, a French ambassador hit somebody. Can the French ambassador
be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: No. The French ambassador enjoys a blanket diplomatic immunity. He is exempt from
the application of the Philippine criminal laws.

Territorial (Principle of Territoriality)

Q: John was counterfeiting 1,000 Peso bills in his apartment in Japan. One day, his
apartment was raided by Japanese authorities. John was arrested and was sent
back to the Philippines. Can John be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine
courts?
A: Yes. Under Article 2(2) of the RPC, any person counterfeiting or forging any coin or
currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands will be liable even if the crime is committed outside
the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. This is another exception to the territoriality
principle.

Page 1 of 2
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Q: Maria, a commissioner of the Commission on Audit, went to USA to investigate

anomalies in the Philippine embassy. While conducting an investigation, he was
approached by Brent and gave her PhP 20 million to give a favorable report. Maria
accepted the money and submitted a favorable report. Maria was charged with
bribery. Can Maria be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: Yes. Under the principle of extraterritoriality, the fact that Maria is a public official, any
acts done by her contrary to her official functions would make her liable in the Philippines
even if the said acts were committed outside the Philippines.

Art. 2(5): Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

The crimes against national security and the law of nations are as follows:
1. Treason (Art. 114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art. 115)
3. Misprision of treason (Art. 116)
4. Espionage (Art. 117)
5. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal (Art. 118)
6. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119)
7. Correspondence with hostile country (Art. 120)
8. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121)
9. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters (Art. 122)
10. Qualified piracy (Art. 123)

Not included: Rebellion, Insurrection, Coup d’état, Sedition, Conspiracy to commit

rebellion, and Conspiracy to commit sedition (They are not included because they are
crimes against public order, and not crimes against national security.)

Q: While staying in Malaysia, Aries, Blake, and Charles committed rebellion against
the Philippines. Thereafter, they went back to the Philippines. Can Aries, Blake, and
Charles be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: No. Rebellion is a crime against public order, and not a crime against national security.
Only crimes against national security and the law of nations are covered by Article 2,
paragraph 5 of the RPC.

Prospective (Principle of Prospectivity)

Q: R.A. No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012) took effect in 2012, thereby
penalizing cyber libel. Due to her malicious posts online against Taylor way back
2010, Kim was charged of cyber libel. Can Kim be charged and prosecuted before
the Philippine courts?
A: No. Under the principle of prospectivity, penal laws should have only prospective
application. When the posts were made online in 2010, there was no law penalizing cyber
libel yet.

Page 2 of 2
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

I. DEFINITION AND SOURCES OF CRIMINAL LAW

Definition and Terms

Criminal Law: that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature,
and provides for their punishment

Criminal Law vs. Criminal Procedure

Criminal law Criminal procedure

defines crimes, treats of their nature, and regulates the steps in the apprehension,
provides for their punishment prosecution, and conviction of an accused
if found guilty
substantive in character remedial in character
prospective, unless favorable to the retroactive, so long as it is in favor of the
accused who is not a habitual delinquent ends of substantial justice
enacted by the Congress promulgated by the judiciary

Dual Nature of a Crime

1. As an offense against the State because of the disturbance of the social order

2. As an offense against the private person injured by the crime, unless it involves
the crimes of treason, rebellion, espionage, contempt, and others wherein no civil
liability arises on the part of the offender either because there are no damages to
be compensated or there is no private person injured by the crime

Crime: a generic term that embraces any violation of the Revised Penal Code, special
penal laws, city or municipal ordinances

Felony: an act or omission violative of the Revised Penal Code committed either
intentionally or negligently (e.g., rape, murder, homicide, robbery, theft)

Offense: an act or omission violative of a special law, i.e., any law other than the Revised
Penal Code (e.g., violation of R.A. No. 9165, violation of R.A. No. 9262)

Misdemeanor: a minor infraction of law (e.g., petty theft, minor in possession of alcohol)

Mala in se vs. Mala prohibita

Mala in se Mala prohibita

“evil in itself” “prohibited evil”
a crime or an act that is inherently immoral an act that is a crime merely because it is
prohibited by statute, although the act
itself is not necessarily immoral
crimes mala in se are wrong from their crimes mala prohibita are wrong because
nature they are prohibited by special laws
penalized under the RPC punished by special laws
in crimes mala in se, intent governs in crimes mala prohibita, intent is
immaterial; thus, good faith and lack of
intent are not valid defenses

Page 1 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

the stages of execution affect the penalty the stages of execution are not considered
imposable in crimes mala in se; thus, the in crimes mala prohibita
penalty depends on whether the crime is
consummated, frustrated, or attempted
e.g., murder, arson, rape e.g., violation of P.D. No. 1866, as
amended by R.A. No. 8294 (illegal
possession of firearms); violation of B.P.
Blg. 22 (issuance of bouncing checks);
violation of P.D. No. 1829 (obstruction of
justice); violation of R.A. No. 9165

Sources of Criminal Law

1. Revised Penal Code and its amendments

2. Special Penal Laws

3. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial Law

Theories in Criminal Law

Classical or Juristic Theory

The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of the penalty is
retribution.

That man is essentially a moral creature with an absolutely free will to choose between
good and evil, thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of the felonious act
than upon the offender.

Positivist or Realistic Theory

That man is not born a criminal but is occasionally subdued by a strange and morbid
phenomenon which constrains him to do wrong contrary to his volition.

This theory goes beyond the retributive penalty and recognizes the redeemable good in
the accused. Hence, the penalty is imposed for preventive and corrective purposes, and
the purpose of penalty is reformation.

Eclectic or Mixed Theory

It is a combination of the positivist and classical theories wherein crimes that have
economic and social causes should be dealt with a modicum of compassion.

Utilitarian or Protective Theory

The primary function of punishment is to protect society from potential and actual
wrongdoers. The retributive aspect of penal laws should be directed against them.

Page 2 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

II. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW

Characteristics of Criminal Law

1. General (Principle of Generality)

2. Territorial (Principle of Territoriality)

3. Prospective (Principle of Prospectivity)

General or Principle of Generality

Criminal law is general in application because it applies to all persons who commit crime
in the Philippines.

Penal law is binding to all persons who live or sojourn in the Philippines, whether citizens
or not. Aliens are covered by the generality principle because they are also protected by
the laws of the Philippines during the time they live or stay temporarily in within the
territory. They owe temporary allegiance to the country. They do not have to be
permanent residents of the Philippines.

Legal basis: Article 14 of the Civil Code of the Philippines

Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be
obligatory upon all who live and sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to
the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.

Exceptions to the General Application of Criminal Law

There are cases where the Philippine Criminal Law does not apply even if the crime is
committed by a person residing or sojourning in the Philippines. They constitute the so-
called “exceptions”.

1. Treaty or treaty stipulations

2. Law of preferential applications

3. Principles of public international law

Treaty or Treaty Stipulations

Treaty: an agreement formally signed, ratified, or adhered to between two countries or

sovereigns; an international agreement concluded between two or more states in written
form and governed by international law

1. The Military Bases Agreement entered into by and between the Philippines and
the United States of America on March 14, 1947, stipulating that, “The Philippines
consents that the US have the right to exercise jurisdiction over some particular
offense.” This already expired on September 16, 1991.

2. The Agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of the
Philippines regarding the treatment of United States Armed Forces visiting the

Page 3 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Philippines (RP-US Visiting Forces Accord) which was signed on February 19.
1998, wherein the Philippines agreed that:

a. US shall have the right to exercise within the Philippines all criminal and
disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the military laws of the US over
US personnel in the Philippines

b. US exercises exclusive jurisdiction over US personnel with regard to

offenses relating to the security of the US punishable under the law of the
US, but not under the laws of the Philippines

c. US shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over US personnel

subject to the military law of the US in relation to:
i. offenses solely against the property or security of the US or offenses
solely against the property or person of US personnel
ii. offenses arising out of any act or mission done in performance of
official duty

Law of Preferential Applications

It is a well-established principle of international law that diplomatic representatives, such

as ambassadors or public ministers and their official retinue, possess immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the country of their sojourn and cannot be sued, arrested, or
punished by the laws of that country.

R.A. No. 75 is considered a law of preferential application in favor of diplomatic

representatives of foreign countries. It is a law that penalizes acts which would impair the
proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants of the Philippines of the immunities,
rights, and privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the
Philippines.

R.A. No. 75 is applicable only where the country of the diplomatic representative affected
provides for similar protection to duly accredited diplomatic representatives of the
Republic of the Philippines.

Principles of Public International Law

The following persons are exempt from the operation of the Philippine Criminal Laws by
virtue of the principles of public international law:

1. Sovereigns and other Chief of State

2. Ambassadors

3. Ministers Plenipotentiary

4. Ministers Resident

5. Charges D’affaires

Diplomatic Representatives vs. Consular Agents

Diplomatic representatives Consular agents

Page 4 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

their main function is to protect the political main function is to protect the commercial
interest of the sending State interest of the sending State
they are the heads of missions or consuls, vice-consuls, and consular
members of diplomatic staff (e.g., agents
ambassadors or public ministers and their
official retinue)
vested with blanket immunity from civil and immune from criminal prosecution of acts
criminal suits performed in the exercise of their function
whether the crime is function-related or vested with consular immunity, provided
not, he is exempt from criminal that the crime is function-related
prosecution

Territorial or Principle of Territoriality

Criminal law is territorial in character because it undertakes to punish crimes committed

within the Philippine territory. Penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable only within its
territory.

Legal basis: Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Article I of the 1987
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

Article 2. Application of its provisions. – Except 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 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 presiding number;

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

exercise of their functions; or

5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

ARTICLE I
National Territory

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands
and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial,
and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the
insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

Page 5 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

General rule: Penal laws of the Philippines have force and effect only within its territory.

Exceptions:

1. The RPC shall not be enforced within or outside the Philippine territories if so
provided under:

a. treaties

b. laws of preferential application

2. As provided under Article 2 of the RPC (principle of extraterritoriality):

a. should commit an offense while on Philippine ship or airship

b. should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or

obligations and securities issued by the Philippine Government

c. should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines
of obligations and securities issued by the Philippine Government

d. while being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the

exercise of their functions

e. should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations

Prospective or Principle of Prospectivity

Criminal law is prospective in character and cannot make an act criminal when it was
innocent at the time it was committed. Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the
time of their commission.

Prospectivity of penal laws means that generally, laws should have only prospective
application unless they are favorable to the offender who is not a habitual delinquent.
Penal laws apply to cases or acts done on the day the law takes effect and onward.

Legal basis: Articles 21 and 366 of the Revised Penal Code

Article 21. Penalties that may be imposed. – No felony shall be punishable

by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.

Article 366. Application of laws enacted prior to this Code. – Without

prejudice to the provisions contained in Article 22 of this Code, felonies and
misdemeanors, committed prior to the date of effectiveness of this Code shall
be punished in accordance with the Code or Acts in force at the time of their
commission.

General rule: Criminal law have prospective application.

Exception: Criminal laws may be given retroactive effect:

Page 6 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

1. when it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual delinquent1

2. when the law itself provides for retroactive application

3. when the law decriminalizes an act

Nulum crimen nula poena sin lege (“No crime without law”)

There is no crime when there is no law that defines and punishes it. One cannot be
punished for violation of a law that has not yet been published at the time of the alleged
commission of the offense.

Construction of Penal Laws

The rules on interpretation may be invoked only when there is ambiguity in the law and
there is doubt as to its interpretation. When the law is clear and unambiguous there is no
room for application of the rules.

How penal laws are construed

1. Liberally in favor of the accused.

No act should be considered criminal unless it is clearly made by the law. The
courts may consider the spirit and reason of a penal law where a literal meaning
would lead to absurdity and injustice, or would defeat the noble intention and clear
purpose of the law.

2. Strictly against the State when the law is ambiguous and there is doubt as to its
interpretation.

3. Spanish text of the RPC prevails over its English translation.

In the construction or interpretation of the provision of the RPC, the Spanish text
is controlling, because it was approved by the Philippine Legislature in its Spanish
text.

4. Equipoise doctrine

When the evidence of the prosecution and of the defense is equally balanced, the
scale should be tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the constitutional
presumption of innocence. He should be acquitted.

5. Doctrine of pro reo

In dubio, pro reo (“When in doubt, for the accused”)

When a circumstance is susceptible to two interpretations, one favorable to the

accused and the other against him, that interpretation favorable to him shall prevail.

1 Under the last subsection of paragraph 5 of Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code, a person shall be
deemed to be habitually delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crime of robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a
third time or oftener.

Page 7 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Limitations on the Power of Congress to Enact Penal Laws

1. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

Constitution, Article III, Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall
be enacted.

Ex post facto law: a law which

a. makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was
innocent when done, and punishes such act

b. aggravates a 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
an offense

e. assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty
of 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 proclamation of amnesty

Bill of attainder: it is a legislative act that inflicts punishment without judicial trial,
its essence being the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial determination of
guilt

2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law.

Constitution, Article III, Section 14(1). No person shall be held to answer for a
criminal offense without due process of law.

3. No law that provides for cruel and unusual punishment shall be passed.

Constitution, Article III, Section 19(1). Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. x x x

4. It must be general in application and must clearly define the acts and omissions
punished as crimes.

Legal Maxims in Criminal Law

Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege (There is no crime when there is no law that
punishes it.)

Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea (The act cannot be criminal unless the mind is
criminal.)

Page 8 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Actus me invito factus non est meus actus (An act done by me against my will is not
my act.)

El ques es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado (He who is the cause of the
cause is the cause of the evil caused.)

Dura lex, sed lex (The law is harsh but it is the law.)

Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Ignorance of law excuses no one.)

References:

Estrada, A., Criminal Law Book I of the Revised Penal Code Made Easy for Students, Bar
Examinees & Practitioners (2008)

San Beda Law, Criminal Law Memory Aid (2018)

The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

Page 9 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW

In summary: Criminal laws shall be applied to a crime committed within the territory of
the Philippines (territoriality) by a person who is residing or sojourning in the Philippines
(generality) on or after the effectivity of the law (prospectivity).

Generality vs. Territoriality

Generality Territoriality
the accused is claiming criminal immunity the accused is claiming criminal immunity
and his argument is based on the unique and his argument is based on the unique
character of his person character of the place where the crime is
committed

General (Principle of Generality)

Q: Ray, an American foreigner, was caught in possession of loose firearms in

violation of R.A. No. 10591. Can Ray be charged and prosecuted before the
Philippine courts?
A: Yes. Applying the principle of generality, all penal laws, including R.A. No. 10591 on
illegal possession of loose firearms, shall be obligatory to all persons residing or
sojourning within the Philippines, regardless of his foreign characteristic.

Q: Mark, an American foreigner, violated the Trademark Law. The defense of Mark
is that he is a foreigner. Can Mark be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine
courts?
A: Yes. All penal laws, including the Law on Trademarks, is obligatory, even if he is an
American citizen, as long as he is residing or sojourning in the Philippine territory.

Note: In these two questions, both issues pertain to the principle of generality since both
the accused (Ray and Mark) are invoking the unique characteristic of their person.

Q: A consular agent rejected the application for visa and defamed the applicant.
Can the consular agent be charged before the Philippine courts?
A: Yes. A consular agent is not exempt from the application of the Philippine criminal
laws. It is not his function to defame an applicant.

Q: While driving, a French ambassador hit somebody. Can the French ambassador
be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: No. The French ambassador enjoys a blanket diplomatic immunity. He is exempt from
the application of the Philippine criminal laws.

Territorial (Principle of Territoriality)

Q: John was counterfeiting 1,000 Peso bills in his apartment in Japan. One day, his
apartment was raided by Japanese authorities. John was arrested and was sent
back to the Philippines. Can John be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine
courts?
A: Yes. Under Article 2(2) of the RPC, any person counterfeiting or forging any coin or
currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands will be liable even if the crime is committed outside
the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines. This is another exception to the territoriality
principle.

Page 1 of 2
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Q: Maria, a commissioner of the Commission on Audit, went to USA to investigate

anomalies in the Philippine embassy. While conducting an investigation, he was
approached by Brent and gave her PhP 20 million to give a favorable report. Maria
accepted the money and submitted a favorable report. Maria was charged with
bribery. Can Maria be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: Yes. Under the principle of extraterritoriality, the fact that Maria is a public official, any
acts done by her contrary to her official functions would make her liable in the Philippines
even if the said acts were committed outside the Philippines.

Art. 2(5): Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

The crimes against national security and the law of nations are as follows:
1. Treason (Art. 114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art. 115)
3. Misprision of treason (Art. 116)
4. Espionage (Art. 117)
5. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal (Art. 118)
6. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119)
7. Correspondence with hostile country (Art. 120)
8. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121)
9. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters (Art. 122)
10. Qualified piracy (Art. 123)

Not included: Rebellion, Insurrection, Coup d’état, Sedition, Conspiracy to commit

rebellion, and Conspiracy to commit sedition (They are not included because they are
crimes against public order, and not crimes against national security.)

Q: While staying in Malaysia, Aries, Blake, and Charles committed rebellion against
the Philippines. Thereafter, they went back to the Philippines. Can Aries, Blake, and
Charles be charged and prosecuted before the Philippine courts?
A: No. Rebellion is a crime against public order, and not a crime against national security.
Only crimes against national security and the law of nations are covered by Article 2,
paragraph 5 of the RPC.

Prospective (Principle of Prospectivity)

Q: R.A. No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012) took effect in 2012, thereby
penalizing cyber libel. Due to her malicious posts online against Taylor way back
2010, Kim was charged of cyber libel. Can Kim be charged and prosecuted before
the Philippine courts?
A: No. Under the principle of prospectivity, penal laws should have only prospective
application. When the posts were made online in 2010, there was no law penalizing cyber
libel yet.

Page 2 of 2
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

I. DEFINITION AND SOURCES OF CRIMINAL LAW

Definition and Terms

Criminal Law: that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature,
and provides for their punishment

Criminal Law vs. Criminal Procedure

Criminal law Criminal procedure

defines crimes, treats of their nature, and regulates the steps in the apprehension,
provides for their punishment prosecution, and conviction of an accused
if found guilty
substantive in character remedial in character
prospective, unless favorable to the retroactive, so long as it is in favor of the
accused who is not a habitual delinquent ends of substantial justice
enacted by the Congress promulgated by the judiciary

Dual Nature of a Crime

1. As an offense against the State because of the disturbance of the social order

2. As an offense against the private person injured by the crime, unless it involves
the crimes of treason, rebellion, espionage, contempt, and others wherein no civil
liability arises on the part of the offender either because there are no damages to
be compensated or there is no private person injured by the crime

Crime: a generic term that embraces any violation of the Revised Penal Code, special
penal laws, city or municipal ordinances

Felony: an act or omission violative of the Revised Penal Code committed either
intentionally or negligently (e.g., rape, murder, homicide, robbery, theft)

Offense: an act or omission violative of a special law, i.e., any law other than the Revised
Penal Code (e.g., violation of R.A. No. 9165, violation of R.A. No. 9262)

Misdemeanor: a minor infraction of law (e.g., petty theft, minor in possession of alcohol)

Mala in se vs. Mala prohibita

Mala in se Mala prohibita

“evil in itself” “prohibited evil”
a crime or an act that is inherently immoral an act that is a crime merely because it is
prohibited by statute, although the act
itself is not necessarily immoral
crimes mala in se are wrong from their crimes mala prohibita are wrong because
nature they are prohibited by special laws
penalized under the RPC punished by special laws
in crimes mala in se, intent governs in crimes mala prohibita, intent is
immaterial; thus, good faith and lack of
intent are not valid defenses

Page 1 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

the stages of execution affect the penalty the stages of execution are not considered
imposable in crimes mala in se; thus, the in crimes mala prohibita
penalty depends on whether the crime is
consummated, frustrated, or attempted
e.g., murder, arson, rape e.g., violation of P.D. No. 1866, as
amended by R.A. No. 8294 (illegal
possession of firearms); violation of B.P.
Blg. 22 (issuance of bouncing checks);
violation of P.D. No. 1829 (obstruction of
justice); violation of R.A. No. 9165

Sources of Criminal Law

1. Revised Penal Code and its amendments

2. Special Penal Laws

3. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial Law

Theories in Criminal Law

Classical or Juristic Theory

The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of the penalty is
retribution.

That man is essentially a moral creature with an absolutely free will to choose between
good and evil, thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of the felonious act
than upon the offender.

Positivist or Realistic Theory

That man is not born a criminal but is occasionally subdued by a strange and morbid
phenomenon which constrains him to do wrong contrary to his volition.

This theory goes beyond the retributive penalty and recognizes the redeemable good in
the accused. Hence, the penalty is imposed for preventive and corrective purposes, and
the purpose of penalty is reformation.

Eclectic or Mixed Theory

It is a combination of the positivist and classical theories wherein crimes that have
economic and social causes should be dealt with a modicum of compassion.

Utilitarian or Protective Theory

The primary function of punishment is to protect society from potential and actual
wrongdoers. The retributive aspect of penal laws should be directed against them.

Page 2 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

II. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW

Characteristics of Criminal Law

1. General (Principle of Generality)

2. Territorial (Principle of Territoriality)

3. Prospective (Principle of Prospectivity)

General or Principle of Generality

Criminal law is general in application because it applies to all persons who commit crime
in the Philippines.

Penal law is binding to all persons who live or sojourn in the Philippines, whether citizens
or not. Aliens are covered by the generality principle because they are also protected by
the laws of the Philippines during the time they live or stay temporarily in within the
territory. They owe temporary allegiance to the country. They do not have to be
permanent residents of the Philippines.

Legal basis: Article 14 of the Civil Code of the Philippines

Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be
obligatory upon all who live and sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to
the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.

Exceptions to the General Application of Criminal Law

There are cases where the Philippine Criminal Law does not apply even if the crime is
committed by a person residing or sojourning in the Philippines. They constitute the so-
called “exceptions”.

1. Treaty or treaty stipulations

2. Law of preferential applications

3. Principles of public international law

Treaty or Treaty Stipulations

Treaty: an agreement formally signed, ratified, or adhered to between two countries or

sovereigns; an international agreement concluded between two or more states in written
form and governed by international law

1. The Military Bases Agreement entered into by and between the Philippines and
the United States of America on March 14, 1947, stipulating that, “The Philippines
consents that the US have the right to exercise jurisdiction over some particular
offense.” This already expired on September 16, 1991.

2. The Agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of the
Philippines regarding the treatment of United States Armed Forces visiting the

Page 3 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Philippines (RP-US Visiting Forces Accord) which was signed on February 19.
1998, wherein the Philippines agreed that:

a. US shall have the right to exercise within the Philippines all criminal and
disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by the military laws of the US over
US personnel in the Philippines

b. US exercises exclusive jurisdiction over US personnel with regard to

offenses relating to the security of the US punishable under the law of the
US, but not under the laws of the Philippines

c. US shall have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over US personnel

subject to the military law of the US in relation to:
i. offenses solely against the property or security of the US or offenses
solely against the property or person of US personnel
ii. offenses arising out of any act or mission done in performance of
official duty

Law of Preferential Applications

It is a well-established principle of international law that diplomatic representatives, such

as ambassadors or public ministers and their official retinue, possess immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the country of their sojourn and cannot be sued, arrested, or
punished by the laws of that country.

R.A. No. 75 is considered a law of preferential application in favor of diplomatic

representatives of foreign countries. It is a law that penalizes acts which would impair the
proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants of the Philippines of the immunities,
rights, and privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the
Philippines.

R.A. No. 75 is applicable only where the country of the diplomatic representative affected
provides for similar protection to duly accredited diplomatic representatives of the
Republic of the Philippines.

Principles of Public International Law

The following persons are exempt from the operation of the Philippine Criminal Laws by
virtue of the principles of public international law:

1. Sovereigns and other Chief of State

2. Ambassadors

3. Ministers Plenipotentiary

4. Ministers Resident

5. Charges D’affaires

Diplomatic Representatives vs. Consular Agents

Diplomatic representatives Consular agents

Page 4 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

their main function is to protect the political main function is to protect the commercial
interest of the sending State interest of the sending State
they are the heads of missions or consuls, vice-consuls, and consular
members of diplomatic staff (e.g., agents
ambassadors or public ministers and their
official retinue)
vested with blanket immunity from civil and immune from criminal prosecution of acts
criminal suits performed in the exercise of their function
whether the crime is function-related or vested with consular immunity, provided
not, he is exempt from criminal that the crime is function-related
prosecution

Territorial or Principle of Territoriality

Criminal law is territorial in character because it undertakes to punish crimes committed

within the Philippine territory. Penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable only within its
territory.

Legal basis: Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Article I of the 1987
Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines

Article 2. Application of its provisions. – Except 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 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 presiding number;

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

exercise of their functions; or

5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

ARTICLE I
National Territory

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands
and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial,
and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the
insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and
connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

Page 5 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

General rule: Penal laws of the Philippines have force and effect only within its territory.

Exceptions:

1. The RPC shall not be enforced within or outside the Philippine territories if so
provided under:

a. treaties

b. laws of preferential application

2. As provided under Article 2 of the RPC (principle of extraterritoriality):

a. should commit an offense while on Philippine ship or airship

b. should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or

obligations and securities issued by the Philippine Government

c. should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the Philippines
of obligations and securities issued by the Philippine Government

d. while being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the

exercise of their functions

e. should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of
nations

Prospective or Principle of Prospectivity

Criminal law is prospective in character and cannot make an act criminal when it was
innocent at the time it was committed. Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the
time of their commission.

Prospectivity of penal laws means that generally, laws should have only prospective
application unless they are favorable to the offender who is not a habitual delinquent.
Penal laws apply to cases or acts done on the day the law takes effect and onward.

Legal basis: Articles 21 and 366 of the Revised Penal Code

Article 21. Penalties that may be imposed. – No felony shall be punishable

by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.

Article 366. Application of laws enacted prior to this Code. – Without

prejudice to the provisions contained in Article 22 of this Code, felonies and
misdemeanors, committed prior to the date of effectiveness of this Code shall
be punished in accordance with the Code or Acts in force at the time of their
commission.

General rule: Criminal law have prospective application.

Exception: Criminal laws may be given retroactive effect:

Page 6 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

1. when it is favorable to the accused who is not a habitual delinquent1

2. when the law itself provides for retroactive application

3. when the law decriminalizes an act

Nulum crimen nula poena sin lege (“No crime without law”)

There is no crime when there is no law that defines and punishes it. One cannot be
punished for violation of a law that has not yet been published at the time of the alleged
commission of the offense.

Construction of Penal Laws

The rules on interpretation may be invoked only when there is ambiguity in the law and
there is doubt as to its interpretation. When the law is clear and unambiguous there is no
room for application of the rules.

How penal laws are construed

1. Liberally in favor of the accused.

No act should be considered criminal unless it is clearly made by the law. The
courts may consider the spirit and reason of a penal law where a literal meaning
would lead to absurdity and injustice, or would defeat the noble intention and clear
purpose of the law.

2. Strictly against the State when the law is ambiguous and there is doubt as to its
interpretation.

3. Spanish text of the RPC prevails over its English translation.

In the construction or interpretation of the provision of the RPC, the Spanish text
is controlling, because it was approved by the Philippine Legislature in its Spanish
text.

4. Equipoise doctrine

When the evidence of the prosecution and of the defense is equally balanced, the
scale should be tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the constitutional
presumption of innocence. He should be acquitted.

5. Doctrine of pro reo

In dubio, pro reo (“When in doubt, for the accused”)

When a circumstance is susceptible to two interpretations, one favorable to the

accused and the other against him, that interpretation favorable to him shall prevail.

1 Under the last subsection of paragraph 5 of Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code, a person shall be
deemed to be habitually delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crime of robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a
third time or oftener.

Page 7 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Limitations on the Power of Congress to Enact Penal Laws

1. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

Constitution, Article III, Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall
be enacted.

Ex post facto law: a law which

a. makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was
innocent when done, and punishes such act

b. aggravates a 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
an offense

e. assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty
of 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 proclamation of amnesty

Bill of attainder: it is a legislative act that inflicts punishment without judicial trial,
its essence being the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial determination of
guilt

2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law.

Constitution, Article III, Section 14(1). No person shall be held to answer for a
criminal offense without due process of law.

3. No law that provides for cruel and unusual punishment shall be passed.

Constitution, Article III, Section 19(1). Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor
cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. x x x

4. It must be general in application and must clearly define the acts and omissions
punished as crimes.

Legal Maxims in Criminal Law

Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege (There is no crime when there is no law that
punishes it.)

Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea (The act cannot be criminal unless the mind is
criminal.)

Page 8 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Actus me invito factus non est meus actus (An act done by me against my will is not
my act.)

El ques es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado (He who is the cause of the
cause is the cause of the evil caused.)

Dura lex, sed lex (The law is harsh but it is the law.)

Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Ignorance of law excuses no one.)

References:

Estrada, A., Criminal Law Book I of the Revised Penal Code Made Easy for Students, Bar
Examinees & Practitioners (2008)

San Beda Law, Criminal Law Memory Aid (2018)

The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

Page 9 of 9
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

ERROR IN PERSONAE

1. Mel waited in ambush for Noel to kill him. After seeing Noel a few meters away, Mel
fired his gun and shot the man dead. It turns out that the man he saw and killed was
not Noel, but Oscar.

Mel is liable for killing Oscar because of the error in personae principle.

2. Erica went out of the house with the intention of assaulting Fiona. But in the
darkness of the evening Erica mistook Grace for Fiona and inflicted upon her a
mortal wound which caused the death of Grace.

Erica is liable for the death of Grace even though there is mistake in identity.

ABERRATIO ICTUS

1. Rose attacked Stella. While the assault was in progress, Tanya, a passerby, was
accidentally hit by the weapon.

Rose is liable for the injuries sustained by Stella and Tanya. The act of Rose in
attacking Stella is an intentional felony. Hence, Rose is responsible for the injuries
sustained by Tanya, which are the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the
felony she committed.

2. Luis discharged a firearm at Mark who was hit. However, because of lack of
precision, Luis also hit and seriously wounded Norman.

Luis is liable for the injuries sustained by Mark and for the death of Norman.

ERROR IN PERSONAE ABERRATIO ICTUS

the unintended victim was hit due to the unintended victim was hit due to
mistake of identity mistake of blow
there is only one victim there are at least two victims

PRAETER INTENTIONEM

1. Ion and Jon had a heated altercation and then exchanged blows. Ion pulled out a
knife and stabbed Jon in the abdomen. Jon ran away, but before he could reach his
house, Jon was struck by a lightning and died.

Ion is not liable for the death of Jon since the lightning is an efficient intervening
cause that broke the relation between the felonious act of Ion and the death of Jon.
X is only liable for physical injuries for the stab wound suffered by Jon.

2. Olive, who was threatened and chased by Nina with a knife, jumped into the water
to escape. As a result, Olive sank down and died of drowning.

Nina is liable for the death of Olive. The death of Olive is the direct, natural, and
logical consequence of Nina’s act of threatening and chasing Olive with a knife.

3. Ben struck Carlo with his fist and knocked him down. Unknown to both Ben and
Carlo, a horse near them jumped upon Carlo and killed Carlo.

Page 1 of 3
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Ben is only liable for the injuries sustained by Carlo, but not for the death of Carlo.
Ben is not liable for the death of Carlo because the death was a result of distinct act
or fact absolutely foreign from the criminal act of Ben.

Not intervening causes (does not break at all the causal connection between the
infliction of injuries of the accused and the death of the victim)

1. delay in giving medical treatment

2. failure to receive proper medical attendance

3. refusal to undergo treatment for his wounds

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

1. The offender, with intent to kill, pulled the trigger of a gun with a dud bullet (defective
bullet).

The act constitutes impossible crime of homicide or murder, as the case may be,
because of the employment of ineffectual means. It is impossible to kill a person
with a dud bullet.

2. Hubert, with intent to kill, thought that the salt, which he mixed with the coffee of
Isaac, is arsenic powder. Isaac drank the coffee.

Hubert is liable for an impossible crime of murder. Murder is not committed due to
the employment of ineffectual means.

ATTEMPTED FELONY

1. Maurine, with intent to kill, pulled the trigger of a gun with live bullets at Nica. As a
consequence, Nica sustained non-mortal wounds. Maurine failed to further shoot
Nica to inflict a mortal wound because she was arrested by a police officer.

Maurine is liable for attempted homicide, since she failed to perform all acts
necessary to execute her criminal design to kill Nica because of her timely
apprehension. Her apprehension and not her spontaneous desistance prevented
her from inflicting a mortal wound on Nica. This is not an impossible crime since
there is a possibility of killing Nica with a gun loaded with live bullets.

2. Karlo fired four successive shots at Liam while the latter was escaping. Because of
poor aim, Karlo was not able to mortally wound Liam.

Karlo is liable for attempted homicide because he failed to perform all the acts of
execution by reason of a cause other than his own spontaneous desistance.

FRUSTRATED FELONY

1. Olive, with intent to kill, pulled the trigger of a gun with live bullets at Patricia. As a
consequence, Patricia sustained mortal wounds. However, Patricia survived due to
medical intervention.

Olive is liable for frustrated homicide. Olive already performed all the acts necessary
to kill Patricia by inflicting mortal wounds. With mortal wounds, Patricia was already

Page 2 of 3
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

dying, but only survived due to medical intervention. The medical intervention, which
is not dependent on the will of Olive, prevented the completion of the crime. This is
not an impossible crime since there is a possibility of killing Nica with a gun loaded
with live bullets.

2. The accused stabbed the offended party in the abdomen, penetrating the liver, and
in the chest. It was only the prompt and skillful medical treatment which the offended
party received saved his life.

3. The accused, in firing his revolver at the offended party, hit him in the upper side of
the body, piercing it from side to side and perforating the lungs. The victim was
saved due to adequate and timely intervention of medical science.

Page 3 of 3
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

III. FELONIES

Definitions

Article 3. Definitions. – Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies

(delitos). Felonies are committed not only be 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.

Felonies: acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code

Elements of felonies (in general)

1. There must be an act or omission, i.e., there must be external acts.

2. The act or omission must be punishable by the Revised Penal Code.

3. The act is performed or the omission is incurred by means of dolo or culpa.

Dolo (deceit): involves malice or deliberate intent

Culpa (fault): results from negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill

Kinds of felonies

1. Intentional felonies: felonies committed with malice or deliberate intent

2. Culpable felonies: felonies committed as a result of imprudence, negligence, lack

of foresight, or lack of skill

Requisites of intentional felonies

1. The offender must have freedom while doing the act or omitting to do the act, i.e.,
that the act or omission was voluntarily and without external compulsion.

2. The offender must have intelligence while doing the act or omitting to do the act,
i.e., capacity to understand the morality and consequences of an act.

3. The offender commits the act with intent.

Illustrations of intentional felonies

1. With intent to kill, Richard fired his gun at Stephen. Stephen was hit and he died
instantaneously. Richard is liable for homicide, which is an intentional felony.

2. Max set the house of Nico on fire. As a result, the house of Nico was razed and
turned to ashes. Max is liable for arson, which is an intentional felony.

Page 1 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Requisites of culpable felonies

1. The offender must have freedom while doing the act or omitting to do the act, i.e.,
that the act or omission was voluntarily and without external compulsion.

2. The offender must have intelligence while doing the act or omitting to do the act,
i.e., capacity to understand the morality and consequences of an act.

3. The offender is imprudent, negligent, or there is lack of foresight or skill while doing
the act or omitting to do the act.

Illustrations of culpable felonies

1. During the celebration of New Year’s Day, PO1 Dalisay fired his firearm in the air.
One of the bullets hit and killed Otep. PO1 Dalisay is liable for reckless imprudence
resulting in homicide, a culpable felony. He did not act with intent to kill. In firing
his gun though, he did not take into consideration that somebody can be injured or
killed in the process. There was lack of foresight on the part of PO1 Dalisay.

2. Ryan, a truck driver, came upon a traffic red light. Instead of slackening his speed
and eventually stop, Ryan stepped on the accelerator. In the process, he hit and
bumped a woman who died. Ryan is liable for reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide. He operated the truck in a reckless and imprudent manner resulting to
the death of the woman.

Criminal Liability

Article 4. Criminal Liability. — Criminal 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.

Mens rea: it is a wrongful criminal intent

Actus rea: it is a wrongful act which is done in furtherance of a wrongful criminal intent

Note: To incur criminal liability for an intentional felony, mens rea and actus rea must be
present.

Motive: it is the reason why a person commits an act

Motive vs. Intent

Motive Intent
the impelling reason which moves a the purpose to use a particular means to
person to commit an act achieve a desired result
not an element of a crime an element of a crime

Page 2 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

When motive is material

1. The act brings about variant crimes.

2. To determine whether a shooting was intentional or not.

3. To determine the specific nature of the crime.

4. When the accused claims self-defense.

Honest mistake of fact: an act or omission which is the result of misapprehension of

facts that is voluntary but not intentional
- the actor performs an act which would be lawful had the facts been as he believed them
to be

Requisites of mistake of fact

1. The act would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them
to be.

2. In performing the act, the intent of the accused was lawful.

3. The mistake was without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.

How criminal liability is incurred

1. El que de la cause es causa del mal causado (“He who is the cause of the cause
is the cause of the evil caused.”)

2. Impossible crime

Error in personae (Mistake in identity)

It is the mistake in the identity of the victim.

In error in personae, the offender is liable even if the victim turns out to be different from
the intended victim.

Illustration of error in personae

Casper intended to kill Dave. One night, Casper shouted at a person whom he thought to
be Dave. An alteration ensued. In the process, Casper fired his gun at the person who
died as a consequence. It turned out that the person Casper shot and killed was not Dave,
but Evan, his father.

Casper is liable for the death of Evan, his father. When Casper fired his gun, he acted
with intent. Casper is liable for all the direct, logical, and natural consequences of his
felonious act, whether foreseen or unforeseen, intended or not. The fact that the victim is
different from the one Casper intended to kill does not exculpate him from criminal liability.

Aberratio ictus (Mistake in blow)

It is when the offender, intending to do an injury to one person, inflicts it on another.

Page 3 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

In aberration ictus, the offender is still liable although the one he injured or killed is another
person because it resulted from his felonious act.

Illustration of aberration ictus

John, with intent to kill, hacked Karl. Karl was not hit, but Leo who was behind Karl. Leo
died.

John is liable for his attempt to kill Karl. John is also liable for the death of Leo. The death
of Leo is a natural consequence of the felonious act of John.

Praeter intentionem (No intention to commit so grave a wrong)

This takes place when the result of the felonious act is graver than what was intended.

In praeter intentionem, the offender is liable for the felony actually caused.

Elements of praeter intentionem

1. An intentional felony has been committed.

2. The wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural, and logical
consequence of the felony committed by the offender.

Illustration of praeter intentionem

Ray boxed Sandro with the intention of inflicting a lump on Sandro. As a result of the blow,
Sandro lost his balance and fell to the ground with his head hitting the pavement causing
his death.

Ray is liable for the death of Sandro. Ray is liable even if the result of his felonious act is
greater than that intended by him.

Proximate cause: that cause, which in a natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by
any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would
not have occurred

Impossible crime: 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 of impossible crime

1. The act performed would be an offense against persons or property.

Crimes against persons: parricide; murder; homicide; infanticide; abortion; duel;

physical injuries; rape

Crimes against property: robbery; brigandage; theft; usurpation; culpable

insolvency; swindling (estafa) and other deceits; chattel mortgage; arson and other
crimes involving destruction; malicious mischief

2. The act was done with evil intent.

Page 4 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

3. Its accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that the means employed is either

inadequate or ineffectual.

4. The act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the
Revised Penal Code.

Factual or physical impossibility: it occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown

to the perpetrator prevent the commission of the intended crime

Illustrations of factual or physical impossibility

1. Stabbing a person who is lying on bed, the offender having the intent to kill him
and thinking that he was only sleeping, when in fact that person had already been
dead before he stabbed him.

The act performed by the offender would have been murder, a crime against
persons, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, it being
impossible to kill a person who is already dead. He is liable for an impossible crime
of murder.

2. Having a sexual intercourse with a woman who is already dead but the offender
thought that she was alive.

Rape cannot be committed against a dead woman. He committed an impossible

crime of rape.

3. Picking a pocket of another which turns out to be empty.

The offender would have been liable for theft, a crime against property, were it not
for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, since theft cannot be
committed when there is no personal property that could be taken. He committed
an impossible crime of theft.

4. Knowing the combination of the safety deposit box of his office, Theo stayed
behind with the intention of stealing the money contained therein. When nobody
was already around, he opened the safety deposit box only to find out that it is
empty of cash.

Theo is liable for an impossible crime of theft. The crime of theft was impossible of
accomplishment since there was nothing to be stolen.

Legal impossibility: it occurs when an essential element of a crime is not present during
its commission making it impossible of accomplishment

Illustration of legal impossibility

Sheila surreptitiously took a watch from the possession of Rain. The watch turned out to
be the same watch she owns but was lost two weeks earlier.

An element of theft is that the offender must take personal property belonging to another.
This element is absent in this case. Sheila cannot be a thief of her own property. However,
Sheila is liable for an impossible crime of theft.

Page 5 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Why are impossible crimes punishable?

The commission of an impossible crime is indicative of the criminal propensity or criminal

tendency on the part of the actor. Such person is a potential criminal.

Stages of Execution

Article 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. –

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

Stages of development of a crime

1. Internal acts: exist in the mind and are not punishable

2. External acts: preparatory acts and acts of execution

Preparatory acts: those initial acts of a person who has conceived the idea of
committing a crime, but which cannot by themselves logically and necessarily ripen
into a concrete offense

Acts of execution: those acts which are directly connected to the intended crime
and are punishable under the Revised Penal Code

Overt act: a physical activity or deed, indicating an intention to commit a particular crime,
more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its complete termination
following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles, nor by
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically ripen into a concrete offense

Attempted felony: the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which would produce the felony by
reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance

Requisites of attempted felony

1. The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts.

2. The offender does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the
felony.

3. The offender’s act be not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance.

Page 6 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

4. The non-performance of all the acts of execution was due to cause or accident
other than the offender’s own spontaneous desistance.

Illustrations of attempted felony

1. Aaron, with intent to kill, hacked Billy, but missed hitting him.

Aaron is liable for attempted homicide. By hacking Billy with intent to kill, Aaron
commenced the execution of the crime directly by overt acts. It is only in the
attempted stage because Aaron did not perform all the acts of execution by not
inflicting a mortal or serious wound.

2. Clyde, with intent to kill, hacked Deo. Deo was hit and suffered a small cut on the
arm that required medical attendance or incapacity for four days.

Clyde committed attempted homicide. By hacking Deo with intent to kill, Clyde
commenced the execution of the crime directly by overt acts. It is only in the
attempted stage because Clyde did not perform all the acts of execution by not
inflicting a moral or serious wound.

Frustrated felony: the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce
the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, does not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator

Requisites of frustrated felony

1. The offender performs all the acts of execution.

2. All the acts of execution performed would produce the felony as a consequence.

3. The felony is not produced.

4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

Illustrations of frustrated felony

1. James, with intent to kill, stabbed Kyle. Kyle was mortally wounded. Kyle was
rushed to the hospital where he was operated on and was saved by medical
intervention.

James committed frustrated homicide. By inflicting a mortal or serious wound,

James was able to perform all the acts of execution. The crime of homicide was
not committed because of the timely medical intervention, a cause independent of
the will of James.

2. Cleo stabbed Delia repeatedly from behind. Delia had no inkling whatsoever that
she will be attacked by Cleo. Delia suffered serious or mortal wounds. The doctors
saved Delia from death.

Cleo committed frustrated murder. This is so because she stabbed Delia with
treachery and was able to inflict mortal or serious wounds that would have caused
the death of Delia had it not been for the doctors who saved her. The medical
attendance was a cause independent of the will of Cleo.

Crimes which do not admit of frustrated stage

1. rape

Page 7 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

2. indirect bribery

3. corruption of public officials

4. adultery and concubinage

Note: In crimes involving violence, if the offender does not inflict a mortal or serious
wound, he does not perform all the acts of execution.

Attempted/Frustrated felony vs. Impossible crime

Attempted/Frustrated felony Impossible crime

the evil intent of the offender can be the evil intent of the offender cannot be
accomplished accomplished
what prevents the accomplishment is the the evil intent of the offender cannot be
intervention of a certain cause or accident accomplished because the means
in which the offender had no part or employed by the offender is inadequate or
independent of his will ineffectual

Consummated felony: all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment
are present

Rule in homicide/murder

1. With intent to kill but no mortal wound is inflicted: attempted

2. With intent to kill and a mortal wound is inflicted but the victim did not die:
frustrated

3. With intent to kill and the victim dies: consummated

Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Conspiracy

Article 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 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: this exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning
the commission of a felony and decides to commit it

Requisites of conspiracy

1. Two or more persons come to an agreement.

2. The agreement concerns the commission of a felony.

Page 8 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

3. The execution of the felony is decided upon.

Examples of conspiracy as a felony

1. conspiracy to commit treason

2. conspiracy to commit rebellion

3. conspiracy to commit insurrection

4. conspiracy to commit arson

5. conspiracy to commit coup d’état

6. conspiracy to commit sedition

7. conspiracy to commit terrorism

Note: Conspiracy (as a felony) is punishable only in the cases in which the law specifically
provides a penalty therefor. There is no crime as a conspiracy to commit a felony when
there is no law punishing it.

Doctrine of implied conspiracy: holds two or more persons participating in the

commission of a crime collectively liable as co-conspirators although absent any
agreement to that effect, when they act in concert, demonstrating unity of criminal intent
and a common purpose of objective

“The act of one is the act of all”

When conspiracy is established, all who participated therein irrespective of the quantity
and the quality of their participation are liable equally, whether conspiracy is planned or
spontaneous. The criminal liability of one is the same as the criminal liability of one of the
others, unless one or more of the conspirators committed another crime which is not part
of the intended crime.

Illustration

Lance, Mico, and Noel decided to kill Oliver. Lance acted as the driver. Mico was the
lookout. Noel stabbed Oliver to death.

All of them are equally liable for the death of Oliver. The act of Noel in stabbing Oliver to
death is also deemed the act of Lance and Mico.

General rule: When the conspiracy is established, all who participated therein regardless
of their participation are equally liable.

Exception: When one or some of the conspirators committed another crime which is not
part of the crime intended.

Illustration

Page 9 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Filip and George agreed and decided to commit robbery in the house of Hayley. In the
process, George raped Hayley, without the knowledge of Filip.

George is liable for the complex crime of robbery with rape. Filip is only liable for robbery.
The crime of rape was not conspired upon.

Proposal to commit a felony: when the person who has decided to commit a felony
proposed its execution to some other person or persons

Note: Proposal to commit a felony is punishable only in cases in which the law specifically
provides a penalty therefor.

When proposal to commit a felony is punishable by law

1. proposal to commit treason

2. proposal to commit rebellion

3. proposal to commit coup d’état

4. proposal to commit insurrection

5. proposal to commit terrorism

Requisites of proposal to commit a felony

1. A person has decided to commit a felony.

2. He proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

Classification of Penalties according to Gravity

Article 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies. – Grave
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 gave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which
in their maximum period are correctional in accordance with
abovementioned article.

Light felonies are those infractions of law or the commission of which the
penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Forty thousand pesos
(₱40,000) or both is provided.

Importance of classification of felonies

1. To determine whether the felonies can be complexed or not.

2. To determine the prescription of the crime and the prescription of the penalty.

Page 10 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Classification (according to gravity)

1. Grave felonies: those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or
penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive

Capital punishment: death

Afflictive penalties: reclusion perpetua; reclusion temporal; perpetual or

temporary absolute disqualification; perpetual or temporary special
disqualification; prision mayor

2. Less grave felonies: those which the law punishes with penalties which in their
minimum period are correctional

Correctional penalties: prision correccional; arresto mayor; suspension; destierro

3. Light felonies: those infraction of law for the commission of which the penalty of
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding ₱40,000.00 or both is provided

References:

Estrada, A., Criminal Law Book I of the Revised Penal Code Made Easy for Students, Bar
Examinees & Practitioners (2008)

San Beda Law, Criminal Law Memory Aid (2018)

The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

Page 11 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

IV. Justifying Circumstances

Definitions

Modifying Circumstances

The RPC subscribes to the classical theory; hence, there is predetermined penalty for
each crime without regard to the moral state of the offender.

It is the office of modifying circumstances to increase or decrease the penalty in

accordance with the presence or absence of circumstances showing the moral,
emotional, and mental state of the offender.

1. Justifying circumstances

2. Exempting circumstances

3. Mitigating circumstances

4. Aggravating circumstances

5. Alternative circumstances

6. Absolutory causes

7. Extenuating circumstances

Justifying Circumstances

Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The 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 or 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
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

Page 1 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

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:

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 fulfillment 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.

Justifying circumstances

Those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law, so that such person
is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both criminal and civil liability.

Any person acting under any of the justifying circumstances does not incur criminal
liability. The act of a person under any of the justifying circumstances is in accordance
with law, so that such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law is free from
both criminal and civil liability, except under Article 11, paragraph 4, where the civil liability
is to be shared by the persons who were benefited by the act.

In justifying circumstances, there is

- no crime
- no criminal
- no criminal liability
- no civil liability (except for Art. 11(4))

Since there is no crime, there is no criminal; hence, he/she should not be called an
“offender” but merely an “actor”.

Basis for the justifying circumstances: lack of criminal intent

1. Self-defense

2. Defense of a relative

3. Defense of a stranger

4. State of necessity

5. Fulfillment of a duty

6. Obedience to a lawful order of a superior

7. Battered woman syndrome (R.A. No. 9262)

Page 2 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Self-defense

Reason: The State cannot afford to give 24-hour protection to its inhabitants and cannot
always come to the aid of the person under attack. He then has to defend himself by
following his instinct of self-preservation. The State recognizes this inherent right of a
person.

Requisites of self-defense

1. unlawful aggression from the victim (condition sine qua non)

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

3. lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself

First requisite: Unlawful aggression

There is no self-defense if there is no unlawful aggression. If there is no unlawful

aggression, there is nothing to repel (which is the second element of self-defense). The
act must be unjustified and sufficient to imperil one’s life, limb, or right.

Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non for upholding the justifying circumstance
of self-defense.

Unlawful aggression contemplates an actual, sudden, and unexpected attack, or

imminent danger thereof, and not merely a threatening or intimidating attitude.

Two kinds of unlawful aggression

1. Actual unlawful aggression: an attack with physical force or with a weapon which
shows the positive determination of the aggressor to cause injury
- it partakes of an act that is positively strong and poses real danger to the life or
limb of another person

2. Imminent unlawful aggression (immediate unlawful aggression): an attack that

is impending or at the point of happening

Three elements of unlawful aggression

1. there must be a physical or material attack or assault

2. the attack or assault must be actual or at least imminent

3. the attack or assault must be unlawful

Retaliation: the aggression that was begun by the injured party already ceased to exist
when the attack happened

Unlawful aggression vs. Retaliation

Unlawful aggression Retaliation
unlawful aggression was still existing the unlawful aggression begun by the
when the aggressor was injured by the injured party had already ceased when the
person making the defense accused attacked him

Page 3 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

there must be no appreciable time interval

between the unlawful aggression and the
killing

Note: When the unlawful aggression ceases, the defender no longer has the right to kill
or even wound the former aggressor.

Illustrations (no unlawful aggression)

1. Mere thrusting of one’s hand into his pocket as if for the purpose of drawing a
weapon is not unlawful aggression.

2. Mere cocking of a gun is not an unlawful aggression.

The mere cocking of an M-14 rifle by the victim without aiming it at the Vice Governor
whom the accused was allegedly protecting does not constitute unlawful
aggression. (Almeda vs. CA)

3. Ryan shouted at Santino, “Wag kang magtatapang-tapangan dyan, papatayin kita!”

Without saying anything more, Santino drew his gun from his waist and shot Ryan
in the leg. Ryan’s wound was not life threatening.

There is neither actual nor imminent unlawful aggression. Verbal abuse without
physical attack does not constitute unlawful aggression. The statement, “Papatayin
kita,” does neither constitute an attack with physical force or with a weapon, an
offensive act that positively determines the intent of the aggressor to cause injury,
nor an impending attack, which is offensive and positively strong.

4. When the accused accepts the challenge, the prior aggression of his opponent
cannot be considered unlawful aggression. Thus, the claim of self-defense cannot
prosper.

When there is an agreement to fight, which is the result of provocation and an

accepted challenge, the aggression is reciprocal and legitimate as between two
opposing parties.

Second requisite: Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel

the aggression

1. there be a necessity of the course of action taken by the person making a defense

2. there be a necessity of the means used

Rational equivalence

Reasonable necessity of the means employed does not mean material commensurability
between the means of attack and defense, what the law requires is rational equivalence
which is determined by the emergency or imminent danger to which the person attacked
is exposed, and the instinct, more than the reason, that moves or impels the defense.

The proportionateness thereof does not depend upon the harm done, but rests upon the
imminent danger of such injury,

Page 4 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Test of reasonableness

1. nature and quality of the weapon used by the aggressor

2. aggressor’s physical condition, character, size, and other circumstances

3. circumstances of those of the person defending himself

4. place and occasion of the assault

Illustrations

1. When the accused is suddenly attack in his sleep, in complete darkness, and in his
paramount fear, he struck wildly and blindly at his assailant who turned out to be his
wife. His frenzy was justified by the circumstances.

2. The accused uses a shotgun to allegedly drive off unarmed persons aggressively
trespassing in and causing damage to his property, the means taken was neither
reasonable nor necessary.

Third requisite: Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
himself

Rationale: When the person defending himself from the attack by another gave sufficient
provocation to the latter, the former is also to be blamed for having given cause for the
aggression.

Provocation: any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of
exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone

Illustrations

1. Oca calls Piolo “pogi” although Piolo is ugly. Piolo got pissed and stabbed Oca.

This constitutes provocation. A praise undeserved is slander in disguise. However,

this is not sufficient provocation and it does not justify Piolo’s act of stabbing Oca.

2. Romeo who was in a joking mood disheveled the hair of Samson. Samson got mad
and said, “Guluhin mo na ang buhay ko, huwag lang ang buhok ko,” and stabbed
Romeo.

The act of Romeo in disheveling the hair of Samson was provocative but it was not
sufficient enough for Samson to stab Romeo.

Illustration (self-defense)

Pat. Derick saw Eugene, an inmate, escaping from jail. Pat. Derick ordered Eugene to
surrender. Instead of doing so, Eugene attacked Pat. Derick with a bamboo spear.
Eugene missed in his first attempt to hit Pat. Derick. But before Eugene could strike again,
Pat. Derick shot and killed him.

Pat. Derick is not liable for the death of Eugene. Self-defense can be claimed as there is
an imminent and great peril on the life of Pat. Derick.

Page 5 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Subjects of self-defense

1. defense of persons

2. defense of rights

3. defense of property

Defense of honor/persons

It encompasses defense of one’s chastity or reputation.

Defense of property

The defense of property rights can be invoked if there is an attack upon the property,
although it is not coupled with an attack upon the person of the owner of the premises, so
long as all the elements for justification must however be present.

Illustrations (other subjects of self-defense)

1. Violent entry to another’s house at nighttime by a person who is armed with a bolo;
and forcing his way into the house, shows he was ready and looking for trouble.

2. Placing a hand by a man on the woman’s upper thigh is unlawful aggression.

3. A slap on the face is also considered as unlawful aggression since the face
represents a person and his dignity.

Defense of a relative

Reason: It is found not only upon a humanitarian sentiment, but also upon the impulse
of blood which impels men to rush, on the occasion of great perils, to the rescue of those
close to them by ties of blood.

Requisites of defense of a relative

1. unlawful aggression against a relative

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

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

Note: The fact that the relative defended gave provocation is immaterial.

Relatives who can be defended

1. spouse

2. ascendants

3. descendants

Page 6 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

4. legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the

same degree

Note: Death of one spouse does not terminate the relationship by affinity
established between the surviving spouse and the blood relatives of the deceased.

5. relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree

a. great great grandparent

b. great aunt and uncle

c. first cousin

d. grandnephew and grandniece

Illustration

1. Kenneth slapped Lenar and thereafter attacked him with a knife. Kenneth hacked
Lenar twice and inflicted injuries upon Lenar. Kenneth continued his attack upon
Lenar. Thereupon, Lenar defended himself and parried the attack of Kenneth by
using his bolo. When Lenar was about to hack Kenneth, that was the time when
Michael, the brother of Kenneth, arrived. Before Lenar could hack Kenneth, Michael
shot Lenar who died as a result.

Michael is not liable. Although Kenneth, his brother, was the aggressor, Michael did
not know about it. When he arrived, he saw that the life of his brother was in danger.
As things appeared to Michael, there was no aggression on the part of Kenneth
which he had to repel. He acted in pursuant to his honest belief. Under the
circumstances, the use of the gun was a reasonable means to repel the aggression.
Michael had no part in the provocation made by Kenneth.

Defense of a stranger

Reason: The ordinary person would not stand idly by and see his companion killed
without attempting to save his life.

Stranger: any person not included in the enumeration of relatives under Article 11,
paragraph 2 of the RPC

Requisites of defense of a stranger

1. unlawful aggression

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

3. the person defending was not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive

Third requisite: The person defending was not induced by revenge, resentment, or
other evil motive

The law requires that the defense of a stranger be actuated by a disinterested or generous
motive.

Page 7 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Illustrations

1. During a student rally, PO1 Cardo, a policeman, hit Carissa, a student, with a
truncheon to disperse the students for conducting rally without permit. Seeing what
PO1 Cardo did, Cham hit the forearm of the policeman with a bottle to prevent him
from further hurting Carissa.

Carissa is not liable for resistance because of the justifying circumstance of defense
of a stranger. The force used by PO1 Cardo to disperse the students is not
reasonable; hence, it constitutes unlawful aggression.

2. Aldrin chanced upon three men who were attacking Brian with fist blows. Carl, one
of the men, was about to stab Brian with a knife. Not knowing that Brian was actually
the aggressor because he had earlier challenged the three men to a fight, Aldrin
shot Carl as the latter was about to stab Brian.

Aldrin may invoke the justifying circumstance of defense of stranger since he was
not involved in the fight and he shot Carl when the latter was about to stab Brian.
There being no indication that Aldrin was induced by revenge, resentment or any
other evil motive in shooting Carl, his act is justified.

Avoidance of greater evil or injury (State of necessity)

Requisites of avoidance of greater evil or injury

1. the evil sought to be avoided actually exists

Note: Greater evil must not be brought about by the negligence or imprudence or
violation of law by the actor.

2. the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it

3. there is no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it

Note: It is only under this provision that the person defending himself incurs civil liability.
Such liability is borne by the person benefited.

Illustrations

1. To save himself from crashing into an unlighted truck abandoned on the road, John
swerved his car to the right towards the graveled shoulder, killing two bystanders.

John is entitled to the justifying circumstance of state of necessity. John, in saving

his life, is in effect avoiding evil. This evil is greater than killing two individuals
because the instinct of self-preservation dictates that the life of the actor is of greater
importance than that of another. There is no other practical and less harmful means
to save his life. John has no choice but to swerve to the right to avoid crashing into
a truck.

2. Esther was set to have an arranged marriage with Evan. Esther eloped with Ethan
after all the wedding preparations with Evan was made. She was a no-show at the
church wedding. Esther was charged with slander by deed.

Esther is not liable for slander by deed. The doctrine of state of necessity is
applicable. There was a necessity on the part of Esther to avoid a loveless marriage.

Page 8 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

The prospect of living a marital life in perpetual agony constitutes an injury greater
than done to avoid it.

Fulfillment of a duty or lawful exercise of right or office

Requisites of fulfillment of a duty or lawful exercise of right or office

1. the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or
office

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

Illustrations

1. The executor of death convicts at the Bilibid Prison cannot be held liable for
homicide or murder for the executions performed by him because he was merely
acting in lawful exercise of his office.

2. If a prisoner who was escaping disregarded the warning shots of the jail guard and
there is no other remedy except to fire at him to prevent him from escaping.

The guard is not criminally liable. It is his duty to prevent the escape of the prisoner
and in doing so, he has the right to employ any means which is not capricious,
arbitrary, and unreasonable.

3. The prisoner who escaped was fired upon by the guard and he was hit on the thigh.
Thereafter, the guard fired again resulting to the death of the prisoner.

There was no absolute necessity to fire again as the prisoner could then easily be
captured, given he was hit on the thigh. The custodian is not justified from killing,
but he is entitled to the privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete
performance of duty.

Obedience to an order issued for some lawful purpose

Requisites of obedience to an order issued for some lawful purpose

1. an order has been issued by a superior

2. such order must be for some lawful purpose

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

Illustrations

1. The Court issued a warrant of arrest against an accused. In implementing the

warrant, the police officer may use reasonable force necessary for its execution. The
act of government authorities in obedience to lawful order of a superior is justified.

2. Christine, the Commissioner on Audit, instructed Daphne, her secretary, to falsify

documents. Christine furnished the information and data which Daphne used for the
falsification.

Page 9 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

Daphne is liable for falsification inasmuch as the instructions given to her by

Christine are not lawful. In order to be exempt from criminal liability, the obedience
must be a compliance with a lawful order, and that the superior acted within the
scope of his authority.

3. A police officer, upon order of the police chief, killed a suspect for not giving an
extrajudicial confession.

The police officer is criminally liable, because the order to execute the suspect is
illegal and the police officer is not bound to obey it.

Battered woman syndrome

Section 26, R.A. No. 9262

Sec. 26. Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense. – Victim-survivors

who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered woman syndrome
do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of
any of the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the
Revised Penal Code.

Battery: any act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman or her child resulting to
physical and psychological or emotional distress

Battered woman syndrome: a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and

behavioral symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as a result of
cumulative abuse

Elements of battered woman syndrome

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

2. the offender, by himself or through another, commits an act or series of acts of

harassment against the woman

3. the harassment alarms or causes substantial emotional or psychological distress

to her

Three phases of the “cycle of violence”

1. Tension Building Phase

a. Where minor battering occurs, it could be a verbal or slight physical abuse

or another form of hostile behavior.

b. The woman tries to pacify the batterer through a show of kind, nurturing
behavior, or by simply staying out of the way.

c. But this proves to be unsuccessful as it only gives the batterer the notion
that he has the right to abuse her.

2. Acute Battering Incident

a. Characterized by brutality, destructiveness, and sometimes death.

Page 10 of 11
 Criminal Law Book I (CLAW 3)
Prepared by: Atty. Shally Mae P. Villa, RPm

b. The battered woman has no control; only the batterer can stop the violence.

c. The battered woman realizes that she cannot reason with him and
resistance would only worsen her condition.

3. Tranquil/Loving (or at least non-violent) Phase

a. Characterized by guilt on the part of the batterer and forgiveness on the part
of the woman.

b. The batterer may show a tender and nurturing behavior towards his partner
and the woman also tries to convince herself that the battery will never
happen again and that her partner will change for the better.

Four characteristics of the syndrome

1. the woman believes that the violence was her fault

2. the woman has an inability to place the responsibility for the violence elsewhere

3. the woman fears for her life and/or her children’s lives

4. the woman has an irrational belief that the abuser is omnipresent and omniscient

References:

Campanilla, M.B., Criminal Law Reviewer Volume I (2020)

Estrada, A., Criminal Law Book I of the Revised Penal Code Made Easy for Students, Bar
Examinees & Practitioners (2008)

San Beda Law, Criminal Law Memory Aid (2018)

San Beda Law, Criminal Law Memory Aid (2019)

The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines

UP College of Law Bar Operations Commission, Criminal Law (2020)

Page 11 of 11