Thank

you for your patience.

QUIZLESS CRIM2 SAMPLEX COMPILATION


**HIGHLIGHTED RED: DIFFERENT ANSWERS


Title I – Crimes Against National Security and the Law of Nations
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
Foreign country X is planning to invade an area of the so-called West NO, such Filipinos cannot be prosecuted for treason. Because actually Checked. - Chrizelle
Philippine sea, which the Philippines claims to be a part of its territory, assembling and gathering together for purposes of overthrowing the
one year from now. A group of Filipinos, in sympathy with that country, Philippine Government must be in the context of a war to constitute It is not necessary that there be a formal
has been sending strategic military information and financial support to treason. declaration of existence of a state of war. Actual
Foreign Country X. In addition, most Filipinos, together with others, hostilities may determine the date of the
actually assembled and gathered together for the purpose of (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) commencement of war
overthrowing the Philippine Government, thereby to pave the way for
Foreign Country X in the event of the planned invasion. Could such
Filipinos be prosecuted for treason; why?
A City Mayor who publicly burns a Singaporean flag, by way of protest Commits inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals Checked. -Chrizelle
for what was widely perceived in the Philippines as the unjust hanging of
a Filipina domestic helper in Singapore, (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. commits no crime, the act being a form of constitutionally
protected symbolic speech
b. commits inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
c. commits malicious mischief
d. commits a crime, but not those mentioned in Items (b) or (c)
Qualified piracy where physical injury, rape, murder or homicide is Special complex crime Checked - Josh
committed, as a result or on the occasion of privacy, is -
a. special complex crime (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
b. an ordinary complex crime
c. a continuing crime
d. a many-splendored crime
An act of robbery or forcible depredation committed in a vessel while on Piracy but only if not committed by members of the complement or crew or Checked - Josh
the high seas is - passengers of the vessel; otherwise, robbery
a. always piracy
b. piracy but only if not committed by members of the (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
complement or crew or passengers of the vessel; otherwise,
robbery
c. always robbery, no doubt, that is, no “ifs” and “buts”
d. piracy but only if committed by members of the complement
or crew or passengers of the vessel; otherwise, robbery
Where the second mate of a vessel, cruising within Philippine waters, Murder, because the specific intent was to vindicate a personal grudge and Checked. -Chrizelle
with evident premeditation and cooperating with all other members of there is evident premeditation
the ship’s complement or crew, kills the captain of the vessel over a RPC Art. 122: This is NOT Mutiny - which is the
personal grudge, the crime is - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) unlawful resitance to a superior, or the raising of
a. mutiny in Philippine waters, which may now be committed in commotions and disturbances on board a ship
Philippine waters owning to the amendment incorporated against the authority of its commander.
into Art. 122, Rev. Pen. Code, by Rep. Act No. 7659
The intent to kill was due to a personal grudge.

1
Thank you for your patience.
b. murder, because the specific intent was to vindicate a
personal grudge and there is evident premeditation
c. homicide only because the act was motivated by a personal
grudge
d. direct assault, the captain of the vessel being deemed a
person in authority under Article 152, RPC
In view of the passage of Rep. Act No. 6235, the plain act of plane May still be punished as grave coercion, as in People v. Ang Cho Kio, 95 Phil. checked- josh
hijacking, not attended by death, injury to persons or damage to 475, because prosecution for grave coercion would not bar prosecution for
property, - high-jacking
a. may no longer be punished as grave coercion, as in People v.
Ang Cho Kio, 95 Phil. 475, but simply as an act inimical to civil (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
aviation, in violation of Sec. 1 of said law (hijacking);
b. may still be punished as grave coercion, as in People v. Ang
Cho Kio, 95 Phil. 475, because prosecution for grave coercion
would not bar prosecution for high-jacking
c. may be punished as grave coercion, as in People v. Ang Cho
Kio, 95 Phil. 475, or as an act inimical to civil aviation, in
violation of Sec. 1, depending solely on the choice of the
prosecution
d. may be punished as grave coercion or as an act inimical to
civil aviation, in violation of Sec. 1 of said law but, in any
event, the accused cannot be punished for both.
Following the amendment of Art. 122 of the Rev. Pen. Code by Rep Act May now be prosecuted both under the Rev. Pen. Code and Pres. Dec No. Checked. -Chrizelle
No. 7659, a person committing piracy in Philippine water - 532, in deference bar prosecution under a special law violated by the same
a. may now be prosecuted both under the Rev. Pen. Code and act of the offender PD 532 covers 2 distinct crimes: piracy and
Pres. Dec No. 532, in deference bar prosecution under a brigandage. It didn't repeal Art. 122 of the Revised
special law violated by the same act of the offender (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) Penal Code, which covers piracy, but gave a separate
b. may only be prosecuted under either the Rev. Pen. Code and treatment on piracy committed in Philippine waters.
Pres. Dec No. 532, because the provisions of both laws on Art. 122 was amended by RA 7659.
piracy in Philipine waters are irreconcilably inconsistent
c. may only be punished under the RPC because there is only
one violation of law; hence, one prosecution. Besides, the
provisions of RPC constitute the latter law
d. may only be punished under PD 532, because there is only
one violation of law; hence one prosecution. Besides, the
provisions ofPres. Dec. No. 532 constitute the earlier law
A Filipino citizen who, adhering to a foreign enemy in time of war Commits treason, punishable under Art. 114, RPC, by reclusion perpetua to Checked. - Chrizelle
involving the Philippines, sends such enemy letters containing useful death
information on the deployment of Philippine troops, intending thereby Treason under RPC ARt 114 may be committed by
to aid the enemy, - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) adherence to the enemies of the Philippines, giving
a. commits a treasonous act but is liable only for penalty of them aid or comfort.
reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua, under Art. 120,
Rev. Pen. Code Giving information to the enemy is evidence of both
b. commits treason, punishable under Art. 114, RPC, by adherence and aid or comfort.
reclusion perpetua to death
c. commits espionage under Art. 116, RPC
d. is guilty of misprision of treason

2
Thank you for your patience.
X and Y agreed and decided to commit treason. They, thereafter, One, namely, treason.
proposed the commission of the same crime to Z and A, who were also
determined to commit treason. Thereafter, all of them committed - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
treason. How many and what crimes were committed by X and Y?
A group of men (X and Others), who appear to be Vietnamese by Yes, piracy on the high seas under the RPC includes those committed Checked. - Chrizelle
nationality, riding on a speedboat, intercepted a cargo vessel in the within the territorial limits of foreign States.
seacoast of Sumatra (and within the territorial limits of the latter) and by
means of violence and intimidation, took valuable personal property - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
from the vessel. They then proceeded to the Philippines on the same
motorboat. The Philippine Coast Guard apprehended them within
Philippine territorial waters, along with several other groups of
Vietnamese boat people, violating Philippine immigration laws. Can X
and Others be prosecuted criminally before the Philippine courts of
piracy if identified by somebody who happened to be among the victims
of their act of depredations committed on the aforesaid cargo vessel
within the territorial limits of Sumatra?
It is but natural for a resident alien, with whose country the Philippines is Such a resident alien commits the crime of flight to enemy’s country if, Checked. -Chrizelle
at war, to return to his home when war breaks out; therefore disregarding prohibitions issued by competent authority, he attempts to
a. He does not commit the crime of flight to enemy’s country if, go home.
disregarding prohibitions issued by competent authority, he
attempts to go home. After all, he is not a Filipino citizen (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
b. Such a resident alien commits the crime of flight to enemy’s
country if, disregarding prohibitions issued by competent
authority, he attempts to go home.
c. Such a resident alien commits an act of war simply by fleeing
to his home country and, in time of war, may be shot instead
of being arrested and prosecuted for flight to enemy’s
country
d. Such a resident alien commits the crime of flight to enemy’s
country if, he attempts to go home, whether or not such
flight is in disregard of prohibition issued by competent
authority
Foreign Country X is planning to invade the Philippines one year from No, because there has not yet been a formal declaration of war with Checked. -Chrizelle
now. A group of Filipinos, in sympathy with that country, has been Country X.
sending financial support to Foreign Country X. Could such Filipinos be
prosecuted for treason? - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
A group of Filipinos and some South Koreans have been residing in Japan No, because South Koreans cannot be punished for treason as they owe no Checked. - Chrizelle
for some time. Suppose that war breaks out between the Philippines and allegiance to the Philippine Government.
North Korea and during the existence of that war, those Filipino citizens
and South Koreans send financial contributions to North Korea from - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
Japan. Can all of them be punished for treason in the Philippines, if after
the war and with the cooperation of the Japanese Government and the
INTERPOL, working with out NBI agents, said Filipinos and South Koreans
were arrested and later brought here for trial?
While the Philippines is at war with Country Z, X and Y agreed and One, namely: Treason checked - josh
decided to commit Treason. They, thereafter, proposed the commission
of the same crime to Z and A, who has also determined to commit If the crime of Treason was committed as a result of conspiracy or proposal If the crime of Treason was committed as a result of
therefor, the latter acts are absorbed threin since the accused becomes a conspiracy or proposal therefore, the latter acts are

3
Thank you for your patience.
Treason. Thereafter, all of them committed Treason. How many and conspirator or principal by inducement whose acts are integrated into the absorbed threin since the accused becomes a
what crimes were committed by X and Y? crime of Treason itself. conspirator or principal by inducement whose acts
are integrated into the crime of Treason itself
(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)

May a non-resident Filipino commit the crime of Misprision of Treason No, because this crime can only be committed by Filipinos who reside in Checked. - Erin
abroad and be punished in the Philippines for the same? the Philippines.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
May an alien residing in the Philippines commit Misprision of Treason? No, unlike Treason, Misprision of Treason cannot be committed by Checked. - Erin
resident aliens.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
Discuss the crime of piracy. It is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas, without lawful
authority and done with animo furandi (intention of stealing) and in the
spirit and intention of universal hostility.

There are 2 ways or modes of committing piracy: (1) by attacking or seizing a
vessel on the high seas or in PH waters; and (2) By seizing in the vessel while
on the high seas or in PH waters the whole or part of its cargo, its equipment
or personal belongings of its complement or passengers.

Elements of piracy:
1. That a vessel is on the high seas or in PH waters
2. That the offenders are not members of its complement or
passengers or vessel
3. That the offenders (a) attack or seize that vessel, or (b) seize the
whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment or
personal belongings of its complements or passengers

(Ge-An, Reyes)

Title II – Crimes Against The Fundamental Law of the State
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
A policeman and a private individual, mocking and showing utter Offending the religious feelings under Art. 133, RPC Checked. - Chrizelle
contempt for what they heard to have been said, threw stones at the
minister of the Iglesia ni Cristo, who was then preaching matters of faith (Hazel, May 27, 2019 Pre-Final/Make up Examination 1-F)
in their chapel. What crime was committed by the policeman and what
crime was committed by the private individual?
Criminal liability for prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of A public officer or employee who is not a participant at such meetings Checked
peaceful meetings under Article 131 of the Revised Penal Code, may be
incurred by - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) -Nico
a. any person who is a p[articipant at such meetings
b. any public officer or employee, whether a participant therein
or not
c. a public officer or employee who is not a participant at such
meetings
d. any person, whether a participant there or not

4
Thank you for your patience.
A is accused of robbery and is arrested by SPO2 B, a member of the YES, SPO2 B should be held liable for arbitrary detention by imprudence. The Checked. - Chrizelle
PNP, by virtue of a warrant of arrest. A put up bail and was ordered facts of the case indicate that A kept telling SPO2 B that he was out on bail
released by the court. 3 days later, SPO2 B saw A at a movie house and but SPO2 B did not make an effort to verify the true facts, instead, SPO2 B
immediately arrested him and took him to the nearest police precinct still detained him. Such was a form of imprudence and since SPO2 B detained
and was kept there til the next morning when SPO2 B took him to the A with no legal ground, SPO2 B is liable for arbitrary detention by
court. All along A was telling SPO2 B that he was out on bail, but SPO2 B imprudence.
would not believe him; neither did SPO2 B make effort to verify if A had
really been released on bail. Could SPO2 B be held liable for arbitrary (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
detention; why?
Yes, because he committed arbitrary detention under Article 124, by
imprudence

(Nico, MCQ June 2018)

The commission of a crime, which includes an attempt at the However, “legal ground” for detention contemplates not only the instances Checked. -Chrizelle
commission thereof, constitutes a legal ground for the detention of when warrantless arrests may be made
persons; -
a. therefore, “legal ground” for detention is exactly equivalent (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
to the instances when warrantless arrests may be made
b. however, “legal ground” for detention contemplates not
only the instances when warrantless arrests may be made
c. consequently, where there is no crime committed, there can
be no “legal ground” for detention
d. therefore, the term “legal ground” for detention simply
translates to probable cause
XX filed an Affidavit-Complaint, charging warrantless search and No, warrantless searches of vehicles have not been defined and penalized by Checked. - Chrizelle
accusing YY and Others conducting a search on his vehicle without being law as crime
armed with a valid warrant. Does the complaint for warrantless search
charge a criminal offense? (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. Yes, for unjust vexation, such a search being at least
annoying or vexatious
b. Yes, for a crime against the fundamental laws of the State,
such a search geing against the Constitution
c. No, warrantless searches of vehicles have not been defined
and penalized by law as crime
d. No, because whatever crime may have been committed,
fulfillment of duty serves as a justifying circumstance in favor
of YY and Others
A is accused of robbery and is arrested by SPO2 B, a member of the Yes, because he committed arbitrary detention under Article 124, by checked - josh
Philippine National Police (PNP), by virtue of a warrant of arrest. A put imprudence
bail and was ordered released by the court. Three days later, SPO2 B
saw A at a movie house and immediately arrested him and took him to (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
the nearest police precinct and was kept there till the next morning
when SPO2 B took him to the court. All along A was telling SPO2 B that
he was out on bail, but SPO2 B would not believe him; neither did SPO2
B make effort to verify if A had really been released on bail. Could SPO2
B be held liable for arbitrary detention?

5
Thank you for your patience.
a. Yes, because he committed arbitrary detention under Article
124, by imprudence
b. No, because SPO2 B acted under a mistake of fact
c. Yes, but not under Article 124, RPC, which does not apply
where the arrest is made by virtue of a warrant of arrest
d. Yes, but only if he has exceeded the periods allowed under
Article 125, RPC, from the time of arrest to the time SPO2 B
took A to court
The widespread practice of unscrupulous police officers of making Is not per se punishable under Republic Act No. 7438, which merely considers Checked. -Chrizelle
invitations to persons being investigated in connection with an offense questioning pursuant to such “invitations” as a form of custodial
he is suspected to have committed, - investigation
a. has been outlawed as a form of arrest and is penalized under
Republic Act No. 7438 (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
b. is not per se punishable under Republic Act No. 7438, which
does not discourage, nay encourage, police officers making
such “invitations”
c. is not per se punishable under Republic Act No. 7438, which
merely considers questioning pursuant to such “invitations”
as a form of custodial investigation
d. is regulated under Republic Act No. 7438 in such a way that
such “invitations” are now required to be accompanied by
appropriate “Miranda warnings”.
The crime of delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper By a public officer or employee whose duty it is to detain or cause the Checked. - Chrizelle
judicial authorities presupposes the arrest of such persons for some detention of persons
legal ground -
a. by any person, including a private individual effecting a (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
citizen’s arrest
b. by a public officer or employee whose duty it is to detain or
cause the detention of persons
c. by a public officer or employee acting on the basis of a
judicial warrant
d. by a person in authority or his agent
A police officer who, without a search warrant, shall surreptitiously Incurs no criminal liability for violation of domicile under Article 128 of the Checked. - Chrizelle
enter a dwelling for the purpose of search but, after being required to Revised Penal Code
leave the premises by the owner thereof, shall prompt do so, - To incur criminal liability under RPC Art. 128: Even if
a. incurs no criminal liability for violation of domicile under (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) the entrance is only without consent, the crime is
Article 128 of the Revised Penal Code committed when there is refusal to leave the
b. commits trespass to dwelling premises when required to do so
c. is, nevertheless, liable for the crime of violation of domicile,
which was already consummate at the time of his discovery
inside the dwelling
d. is liable only for unjust vexation
Whether an act is notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful is The subjective feelings of the faithful claiming to have been offended Checked. - Chrizelle
to be determined on the basis of -
a. an objective standard that takes into account what would (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
commonly or generally appear to be offensive to all religious
sects, given contemporary community standards, and not

6
Thank you for your patience.
just the subjective feelings if the followers of the religious
sect alleged to have been offended
b. the subjective feelings of the faithful claiming to have been
offended
c. a textual analysis of words uttered or an attitudinal
evaluation of the behavior or conduct exhibited
d. the totality of the circumstances leading to and surrounding
the act
The second element of the crime of delay in the delivery of detained Arbitrary Detention Checked. -Chrizelle
persons to the proper judicial authority is that the person detained is so
detained for some legal ground. What would be the offense if that (Pre-Final/Make Up Examination 1-F 2019) RPC Art. 124: The elements under Arbitrary
element is lacking? Detention: (1) Offender is public officer or employee
(2) He detains a person (3) Detention is without legal
grounds

In Arbitrary Detention – the detention is illegal from
the beginning

On the other hand, Delay in the Delivery of Detained
Persons to Proper Judicial Authority – the detention
is legal in the beginning but illegality starts from
expiration of period.
Would the filing of a complaint with the Office of the Prosecutor No, because what is contemplated therein is the filing of a complaint or Checked. -Chrizelle
constitute the sufficient compliance with the requirements of Article information with the judicial authority empowered to issue a warrant of
125, Revised Penal Code, as regards the delivery of detained persons to arrest or of commitment for temporary confinement of a person surrendered
the proper judicial authorities? in order to legalize the detention of the person arrested without a warrant.

(Pre-Final/Make Up Examination 1-F 2019)
At a baptismal party, where all the guests were Catholics, a priest who No, because it does not appear that a religious ceremony was going on nor Checked. - Erin
was there was slapped and gravely slandered by a man belonging to was the place dedicated to religious worship.
another religion. Is that man liable for Offending the Religious Feeling?
-Chrizelle (Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)

Title III – Crimes Against Public Order
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
May a person who did not actually take up arms against the government Yes provided he is in conspiracy with those engaged in actually taking up Checked. - Chrizelle
but, entertaining the purpose of rebellion, performs other overt acts in arms against the government, like a courier or spy.
furtherance of rebellion, be held liable for rebellion? Midterm Examination Reviewer (Undated) for Sec 1-C; #68, p. 24; Midterm
Examination January 19, 2012 Section 1-D #40 p. 9
Reyes p. 88

Actual clash of arms with the Gov't is NOT NECESSARY. The mere fact that the
accused knowingly identified himself with the organization openly fighting to
overthrow the gov't is enough. (Reyes p. 87) -RenzoA
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

7
Thank you for your patience.
May a group of non-resident aliens who, while in this country, rose Yes "any person" may commit rebellion and the matter of allegiance, whether checked - josh
publicly and took up arms against the Government, for the purpose of permanent, temporary or lacking is immaterial.
overthrowing the same, be held liable for rebellion?
Source: E (2015-2016) FINALS MCQ Tester (Item# 20)

Text Source: Reyes (Page 89)

Additional notes:
RPC Art. 134:

Rebellion may be committed by any person.However, it may only be
committed in the PhilippinesUnlike Rebellion, Treason may only be
committed by a Filipino Citizen or an alien residing in the Philippines because
the matter of allegiance, whether permanent or temporary is material.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
What would be the crime where rebellion is proved to have been Rebellion checked - josh
proposed or incited by the accused, if the crime of rebellion is actually Source: 1E (2015-2016) FINALS MCQ Tester #23
committed by the people to whom the proposal was made or who are In both Proposal and Inciting to Commit Rebellion,
incited to commit it? Additional notes: the crime of Rebellion should not actually be
In both Proposal and Inciting to Commit Rebellion, the crime of Rebellion committed by the persons to whom it is proposed
should not actually be committed by the persons to whom it is proposed or or who are incited.
who are incited. If they commit rebellion because of the proposal or inciting, If they commit rebellion because of the proposal
the proponent or the one inciting may become a principal by inducement in or inciting, the proponent or the one inciting may
the crime of Rebellion. become a principal by inducement in the crime of
Rebellion
-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)




A group of persons rose publicly and took up arms against the forces of NO. The facts only indicate the objective element of rebellion, but not its Checked. - Chrizelle
the Government, resulting in the killing of certain policemen. Some of subjective element.
those who rose publicly were killed and those who were captured Midterm Examination Reviewer (Undated)
refused to give any statement or make any admission. On those facts, Section 1-C #66
are they liable for rebellion?
The samplex has a more extensive answer.

"No, the facts only indicate the objective element of rebellion, but not its
subjective element. It is necessary for the facts to show the purpose of the
action. Under Art. 134, the purpose of the action must either be:
(i) Removing from alliegance of said government or the law the territory of
the Philippines or any part thereof or any body of land, naval, or other armed
forces or
(ii) Depriving, wholly or partially, any of the powers or prerogatives of the
Chief Executive or Congress."

8
Thank you for your patience.

- Baltazar
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

KD, who appears to be an area leader of the New People’s Army, YES, the crime would be classified as rebellion only because of the political Checked. -Chrizelle
Sparrow Unit, directed AM, CA, DR, and VB members of the NPA to go motive behind it which absorbs murder in furtherance thereof. From the facts
to Barrio Punti and kill one RA, who was suspected by KD to be a of the case, it is imperative that the crime of murder in killing RA was because
Philippine Army (PA) informer. All four of them went to the barrio of RA, of a political motive, which is to eliminate a suspected Philippine Army (PA)
AM carrying a Browning shotgun, DR a Thompson, CA a carbine and VB a informer. Murder is only used as a means for carrying out rebellion.
homemade gun called Bulldog. They arrived at Punti at 9 o’clock AM and
they saw RA at the river bank giving his carabao a bath. DR went to RA (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
and after a while, shot him with his gun. AM also shot him with his
Browning followed with another shot by CA, as a result of which RA fell
down and died. AM then placed on the dead body of RA a writing and
drawing made by their association warning the people and the PA of
their activities. Thereafter, the group returned and reported to KD that
RA was already dead. After subsequent apprehension, an information
was filed by the provincial fiscal charging AM, VB and CA of the crime of
murder. After conviction for murder, AM appealed. Can it be contented
in this appeal that the crime committed is not murder but rebellion
only? Why?
A, a lady professor, was giving an examination. She noticed B, one of the B committed 2 separate crimes of direct assault and indirect assault. B
students, cheating. She called the student’s attention and confiscated committed direct assault against A because he employed force against A, who
his examination booklet, causing embarrassment to him. The following is a person in authority, by slapping her. On the other hand, B committed
day, while the class was going on, the student, B, approached A and, indirect assault against C, who aided a person in authority (A), because B
without any warning, slapped her. B would have inflicted further injuries employed force against C by punching the latter.
on A had not C, another student, come to A’s rescue and prevented B
from continuing his attack. B turned his ire on C and punched the latter. (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
Under the circumstances, for what crime, if any, is B liable; why?
“A” wanted to eliminate his political rival “B” before the election, which A should be prosecuted for sedition on one hand as he, together with some checked -josh
was about to take place in their province. “A” had an understanding members of the NPA, who were engaged in continuing hostilities against the
with some members of the NPa roaming the mountains of Quezon government, acted in conspiracy and attacked B. A should also be prosecuted
Province, whose commander was his friend, to the effect that said NPA for the separate and individual crimes of serious physical injuries because of
members would attack the town where “B” was living and serving a infliction of such on the person of B and the crime of arson because of
municipal mayor, with the particular end in view of killing “B”. During burning the house of B.
the attack on the said town made by the NPA members in which “A”
also took part, “B” was seriously injured and his house was burned. (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
Considering that the members of the NPA were engaged in continuing
hostilities against the Government and “A” was, as regards the subject
incident, in conspiracy with said NPA members, of what crime or crimes
would you find “A” liable; why?
Two rival groups of jeepney drivers, all armed attacked each other in NO, the two rival groups of jeepney drivers did not commit sedition. Because Checked. - Chrizelle
Plaza Miranda, using their arms even against the policeman who tried to although there was a public and tumultuous uprising, the object was not to
stop them and restore order in the place. The attack being tumultuous prevent the policemen from freely exercising their official functions nor to
and the commotions occurring in a public place, did the rival groups of attain any other object of sedition.
jeepney drivers commit sedition; why?
(Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)

9
Thank you for your patience.
Where a policeman is attacked and killed by the offender by means of Direct assault with homicide Checked. - Chrizelle
fist blows, knowing the former to be a policeman, while in the
performance of duty, albeit none of the circumstances enumerated in (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
Art. 248, RPC, attended the killing, the offender commits the crime of -
a. simple direct assault
b. qualified direct assault
c. direct assault with homicide
d. direct assault with murder
Two rival groups of jeepney drivers, all armed attacked each other in No, the crime of sedition was not committed by them because, although checked - josh
Plaza Miranda, using their arms even against the policemen who tried to there were public and tumultuous uprising, its object was not not to prevent
stop them and restore order in the place. The attack being tumultuous the policemen from freely exercising their functions, or to attain any other
and the commotions occurring in a public place, did the rival groups of object of sedition.
jeepney drivers commit sedition?
SAMPLEX Jan 2012 Midterms #21
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
In a meeting, where many persons were invited to consider ways and Answer from 2012 Samplex: Checked. - Chrizelle
means of improving the community, X volunteered to speak and, in the No, because the purpose of the meeting, in the first place, is lawful, that is to
course of his speech, he incited the audience to carry arms and use consider ways and means of improving the community.
force or violence against the mayor and councilors for neglecting their
duties. Is that meeting an illegal assembly? Magi
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

A slapped a barangay captain, who was helping a policeman in According to samplex (2015-2016): "Yes, the force employed upon a person in Checked. - Chrizelle
preserving order in a procession. Has the crime of direct assault been authority need not be serious and such laying of hands, without distinction,
committed in this case? even qualifies the crime."
- Baltazar

Additional notes:
In this case, the crime of direct assault has been committed, specifically the
second form of direct assault. A barangay captain is considered as a person in
authority, based on Art. 152. All the elements of the second form of direct
assault are met in this case.
Person in Authority - Reyes, p. 135

Elements of Second Form of Direct Assault - Reyes, p.132

(not sure lang if 4th element (offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a
person in authority or his agent in the exercise of his duty) is present.)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
A, charged with parricide, was confined in the Bilibid prisons in No, his case is not covered by Art. 158 nor by any other provisions of the RPC. Checked. -Chrizelle
Muntinlupa pending trial. There occurred a disorder resulting from the One of the elements of this crime is that the offender is a convict by final
strong earthquake. A was one of those who left the prison, because of judgment and is confined in
the earthquake. He never returned to the prison nor gave himself up to a penal institution. In this case, A has not been convicted by a final judgment.
the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation (Elements p. 21)
announcing the passing away of the calamity. May A be prosecuted and Also, other crimes of evasion requires that the offender is a convict by final
punished for violation of Art. 158, RPC? judgment (Elements pp.
20-21
1E (2015-2016) FINALS MCQ

10
Thank you for your patience.
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
While X was serving sentence for homicide, he inflicted serious physical "X is a Quasi-Recidivist because he committed Serious Physical Injuries while Checked. -Chrizelle
injuries on another prisoner thereat. How would you characterize X serving his sentence for Homicide which satisfies the requirements of Art 160"
under those facts?
Quasi-Recidivism involves 2 crimes:
(a) 1st one may be any crime, whether punished under RPC or
special laws; need not be a felony
(b) 2nd one, which is committed before serving sentence for the
first one, or while serving the same, should be a felony
Moreover, does not require that the 2 crimes be under the same title
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
A group of about 20 persons, armed with bolos, daggers, and licensed Yes, but only as regards the person who carried an unlicensed firearm, by Checked. - Erin
pistols, were gathered together in a certain place, holding a meeting. A legal presumption which is even rebuttable, and not as to the rest.
group of Philippine Army soldiers, who were suspecting them,
investigated each and every one of them on the spot, but not one of Additional notes:
those persons revealed the purpose of the meeting. It turned out that RPC Art 146 punishes a meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose
one of those persons who attended the meeting carried an unlicensed of committing any of the crimes punishable under the RPC.
firearm. Is this an illegal assembly?
If the purpose of the meeting cannot be ascertained, the presence of a person
carrying an unlicensed firearm raises the presumption that the purpose of the
meeting insofar as he is concerned is to commit acts punishable under the
RPC.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

What crime would be committed if the offenders who dissolved or Disturbance of public order under Art. 153, RPC Checked. - Chrizelle
interrupted a peaceful meeting without legal ground are private Sec 1-E Final Exam, June 6, 2018, Part III # 17, p. 6
individuals who are not participants in the meeting?
More detailed answer according to samplex (2015-2016):

"Disturbance of public order under Art. 153, RPC. Art. 153 punishes the action
of interrupting or disturbing performances, functions, gatherings, or peaceful
meetings, if the act is not included in Arts. 131 and 132."
-Baltazar
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
In the process of resisting his arrest by elements of the Western Police Direct Assault with Homicide and Serious Physical Injuries
District (WPD), X engaged in a gunfight with them, killing one policeman,
and seriously injuring two (2) others. For what crime or crimes may X be Additional notes:
prosecuted? This is the second form of Direct Assault: Without public uprising, by seriously
resisting any person in authority or any of his agents, while engage in the
performance of official duties, or on the occasion of such performance.

General Rule - Direct Assault is always complexed with material consequences
of the act Exception - If resulting in a light felony, th consequent crime is
absorbed.

-Chrizelle

11
Thank you for your patience.
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
Discuss the so-called “theory of absorption” in rebellion and explain, "Any or all of the acts described in Art. 135, when committed as means to or
with reasons, whether or not it applies to (a) coup d’etat ; and (b) in furtherance of the subversive ends described in Art. 134, become absorbed
sedition in the crime of rebellion and cannot be regarded or penalized as distinct
crimes in themselves."

For sedition, in the case of People v Cabrera, the constabulary men who, to
inflict an act of revenge upon the policeman, murdered six policemen and two
private citiens and seriously wounded three civilians were found guilty of the
separate crimes of sedition in one case, and multiple murder with grave
injuries in the other case.

For coup d'etat - Unlawful acquisition/possession of firearms and ammunition
and use of loose firearm, in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection
with the crime is absorbed is absorbed in attempted coup d'etat

Reyes book (p. 98) for rebellion
Reyes book (p. 110) for sedition
BEDA Memaid (2018) (p. 137)


Additional notes:
Sedition General Rule - Common crimes are not absorbed in Sedition.
Exception - Sedition absorbs the use of unlicensed firearms as an element
thereof. Hence, the crimes of Serious Physical Injuries and Arson are to be
punished as Separate Crimes.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
The Solicitor General points to FS’ affidavit, dated 25 February 2006, as No, those statements in FS’ affidavit merely allege a conspiracy to commit Checked. - Chrizelle
basis for the finding of probable cause against CB for rebellion, as FS rebellion and the Information charges CB with the crime of Rebellion
provided details in his statement regarding meetings CB and the Others
attended in 2005 and 2006 in which plans to overthrow violently the (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
Arroyo government were allegedly discussed, among others. the
Information in fact merely charges CB for “conspiring and
confederating” with others in forming a “tactical alliance” to commit
rebellion. Should a charge for rebellion against CB be sustained?
a. Yes, these statements in FS’ affidavit constitute sufficient
basis for the finding of probable cause against CB for the
crime of rebellion
b. No, those statements in FS’ affidavit merely allege a
conspiracy to commit rebellion and the Information charges
CB with the crime of Rebellion
c. No, although the Information charges CB with rebellion, the
statements in the affidavit of FS merely serve to establish
conspiracy to commit rebellion

12
Thank you for your patience.
d. No, although the statements in the affidavit of FS establish
probable cause for rebellion but the Information merely
charges conspiracy to commit rebellion
X is a detention prisoner awaiting trial of his case for murder Because of W alone is liable, for the crime of delivery of prisoners from jail Checked. - Chrizelle
an attack of hypertension, X was brought to a hospital for treatment and
confinement. While X was in the hospital, the wife of X (W0, posing as a (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
nurse and taking advantage of the inattentiveness of the guard assigned
to X, brough X out of the hospital on a wheel-chair, thus enabling X to
escape. In terms of their respective criminal liabilities:
a. X would be liable for evasion of sentence for having escaped
from jail and W would be liable as an accessory to murder,
having assisted in the escape of a principal to the crime of
murder
b. X would be liable as a principal by indispensable cooperation
in the crime of delivery of prisoners from jail, while W is
liable for the same crime as principal by direct execution
c. X is not liable for any crime, much less delivery of prisoners
from jail, while W is immune from prosecution because of
marital privilege, which exempts her from criminal liability
under Article 20, RPC
d. W alone is liable, for the crime of delivery of prisoners from
jail
The crime of direct assault is not qualified by: Evident premeditation Checked. - Chrizelle
a. evident premeditation
b. the offender being a member of the Philippine National (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
Police or of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
c. slapping a Barangay Captain/Chairman
d. using a fan knife
During a meeting in Manila of members of the Municipal Mayors The crime of public disturbance under Article 153, RPC Checked. - Chrizelle
League, composed of municipal mayors of the different municipalities in
the Philippines, organized by “some of them” in order to re-launch a (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
failed bid to revise the Constitution through people’s initiative, “several
of them” created a disturbance, resulting in the interruption of the
meeting liable for:
a. the crime of interruption of peaceful meeting under Article
131, RPC
b. the crime of unjust vexation under Article 287, 2nd
paragraph, RPC
c. the crime of public disturbance under Article 153, RPC
d. the crime of alarms and scandal under Article 155, RPC
In the process of resisting his arrest by elements of the Western Police Direct assault with homicide and serious physical injuries checked- josh
District (WPD), X is engaged in a gunfight with them, killing one
policeman, and seriously injuring two (2) others. Under the (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
circumstances, X may be prosecuted for:
a. direct assault
b. murder
c. homicide with serious physical injuries
d. direct assault with homicide and serious physical injuries

13
Thank you for your patience.
Interruption of a peaceful meeting is penalized under Article 131, Rev. Interruption of peaceful meetings under Article 153, 1st paragraph Checked. - Chrizelle
Pen. Code, when committed by a public officer or employee, unless the contemplates private persons as offenders but can be committed by public
peaceful meeting is a manifestation or ceremony of any religion, in officers or employees who are participants therein
which case, such offender incurs criminal liability under Art. 132 of the
same Code; consequently, (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. interruption of peaceful meetings under Article 153, 1st
paragraph, of the Rev. Pen. Code contemplates private
persons as offenders and cannot be committed by public
officers or employees
b. interruption of peaceful meetings under Article 153, 1st
paragraph contemplates private persons as offenders but can
be committed by public officers or employees who are
participants therein
c. interruption of peaceful meetings under Article 153, 1st
paragraph, of the Rev. Pen. Code can only be committed by
any person who is a participant therein
d. interruption of peaceful meetings under Article 153, 1st
paragraph, of the Rev. Pen. Code can be committed by any
person who is not a participant therein
A, the mayor of the town, and B, a private individual were engaged in a No, although they quarreled about performance of duty, the matter was still Checked. - Erin
conversation in front of the municipal building. In the course of their of a private nature not involving performance of duty.
conversation about town politics, B and the mayor became engaged in
the altercation regarding how mayors should perform their duties, Under RPC Art. 148: In order to be liable for Direct Assault - At the time of the
resulting in B’s giving a fist blow on the lips of the mayor. Is B liable for assault, the Person in Authority or his Agent: (i) Is engaged in the actual
direct assault? performance of official duties, OR (ii) That he is assaulted by reason of past
performance of his official duties

When Descended to matters which are private in nature - the PA or APA is
considered not in the performance of official duties.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
During the disorder in Bilibid Prisons, resulting from the killing of certain (d) Yes, for evasion of service of sentence under Art. 157, RPC Checked. -Chrizelle
prisoners by other prisoners, and wherein guards were disarmed by No. 27 of 2012 Midterms Samplex
certain prisoners, A, a prisoner serving sentence by final judgment,
escaped for fear that he might be also killed. He never gave himself up (Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
to the authorities even if the disorder had already ceased to exist. Is he
liable criminally?

One who takes up arms or is in open hostility against the government Commits rebellion only Checked. - Chrizelle
and who, by means of speeches, incites others to the execution of acts
of rebellion - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. commits rebellion and, also, inciting to rebellion
b. commits only inciting to rebellion
c. commits rebellion only
d. commits the crime of rebellion complexed with inciting to
rebellion

14
Thank you for your patience.
The crime of inciting to sedition is committed by: Knowingly concealing the evil practice of publishing scurrilous libels against Checked. - Chrizelle
a. inciting others, by means of speeches, to prevent the the government which incite riots
execution of any law
b. shouting in a public place in a manner tending to incite (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
others to prevent the execution of any law
c. making speeches encouraging disobedience to the law
d. knowingly concealing the evil practice of publishing scurrilous
libels against the government which incite riots
The crime committed where A, B, and C rise publicly to attain by force or Public disturbance RPC Art 139(4) punishes offenders who rise
intimidation the commission of an act of hate or revenge against D, a publicly to attain by force of intimidation, an act of
private person, for some political or social end: (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) hate or revenge against a private person for any
a. sedition political or social end.
b. direct assault Sedition under RPC Art 139 -Explanation in reviewer, finals 2016 Compilation
c. terrorism -Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation
d. public disturbance
A public officer or employee who conspires with rebels and accepts an Rebellion Checked. - Chrizelle
appointment to office under them is guilty of -
a. disloyalty under Article 137, Revised Penal Code (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
b. sedition
c. rebellion
d. aiding and abetting a rebellion
A person who, without taking any direct part in a sedition, proposes to Incurs no criminal liability Checked. - Chrizelle
another person in a Christmas greeting card addressed to the latter, the
commission of acts which constitute sedition, (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. incurs no criminal liability
b. is guilty of proposal to commit sedition
c. is liable for inciting to sedition
d. is guilty of lawful utterances
Since Republic Act No. 1700 has been repealed, knowing membership in Not punishable as subversion but constitutes the crime of membership in an Checked. - Chrizelle
the Communist Party of the Philippines, an organized conspiracy whose illegal association
aim is decidedly to overthrow the Government of the Philippines
through protracted armed struggle or other violent means, is (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
a. no longer punishable
b. not punishable as subversion but constitutes the crime of
membership in an illegal association
c. no longer punishable as subversion but continues to be
punishable as rebellion
d. punishable as conspiracy to commit terrorism
One who has been sentenced to destierro - Can commit jail-breaking or evasion of sentence because such penalty Checked. - Chrizelle
a. cannot commit jail-breaking ir evasion of sentence because involves deprivation of liberty
such penalty does not involve a term of imprisonment
b. can commit jail-breaking or evasion of sentence because (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
such penalty does not involve a term of imprisonment
c. can commit jail-breaking or evasion of sentence even if such
penalty does not involve a term of imprisonment
d. can commit jail-breaking or evasion of sentence because
such penalty involves deprivation of liberty

15
Thank you for your patience.
Rebellion is an offense that is - Bailable as regards followers and, as regards leaders bailable only when the Checked. - Chrizelle
a. non-bailable, as regards both leaders and followers evidence of guilt is not strong
b. non-bailable but only as regards leaders, not so as to the
followers (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
c. bailable as regards leaders and followers
d. bailable as regards followers and, as regards leaders bailable
only when the evidence of guilt is not strong
The Revised Penal Code treats of homicide or murder, or other offenses Either as integral elements of rebellion or as distinct offenses from rebellion. Checked. - Chrizelle
that might conceivably be committed in the course or in furtherance of Therefore, the prosecution has a choice, depending on evidence on hand, to
rebellion - prosecute such acts as rebellion or as distinct offenses, subject to proof by the
a. as distinct offenses from rebellion. Therefore, prosecution defense as to political motive underlying the act.
for such offenses committed in the course of rebellion may
always prosper independently of rebellion (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
b. as integral elements of rebellion. Therefore, no prosecution
for such offenses committed in the course of rebellion may
prosper independently of rebellion
c. as components of a complex offense with rebellion.
Therefore, the prosecution has a choice, depending on
evidence on hand, to prosecute such acts as rebellion or as
distinct offenses, subject to proof by the defense as to
political motives
d. either as integral elements of rebellion or as distinct offenses
from rebellion. Therefore, the prosecution has a choice,
depending on evidence on hand, to prosecute such acts as
rebellion or as distinct offenses, subject to proof by the
defense as to political motive underlying the act.
A private person who comes to the aid of a lawyer who is being Indirect assault Checked. - Chrizelle
assaulted while in the performance of professional duties and who is
himself attacked as a consequence thereof, thereby suffering slight (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
physical injuries, is the victim of
a. direct assault
b. indirect assault
c. direct assault with slight physical injuries
d. indirect assault with physical injuries
The crime of evasion of service of sentence under Art. 157, RPC is Are liable under Art. 156, RPC, for delivery of prisoners from jail Checked. - Chrizelle
committed by prisoners serving sentence by final judgment who escape
from jail, but persons aiding them in such escape - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) RPC Art. 156 - Delivering Prisoners from Jail:
a. do not incur criminal liability under said Article, nor under
Art. 156 of the same Code for delivery of prisoners from jail May be committed through helping person
b. are liable under Art. 156, RPC, for delivery of prisoners from confined in jail or penal establishment to escape -
jail furnish material means to facilitate escape.
c. are liable under Art. 157, as principals by indispensable
cooperation in the crime of evasion of sentence Prisoner may be a detention prisoner or one
d. commit the crime of evasion of service of sentence as co- sentenced by virtue of final judgment.
conspirators, because where there is conspiracy, the act of
one is the act of all

16
Thank you for your patience.
A person who, without taking any direct part in a sedition, proposes to Incurs no criminal liability. checked - josh
another person in a Christmas greeting card addressed to the latter, the To be criminally liable under RPC Art. 141 -
commission of acts which constitute sedition, Conspiracy to Commit Sedition:
a. Incurs no criminal liability (a) There must be an agreement and a decision to
b. Is guilty of proposal to commit sedition (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) rise publicly and tumultuously to attain any of the
c. Is liable for inciting to sedition objects of sedition in order to constitute the crime
d. Is guilty of unlawful utterances of Conspiracy to Commit Sedition
(b) There is no proposal to commit sedition

A person who comes to the aid of a person in authority is deemed an Therefore, the mere employment of serious resistance against such person, Checked. - Chrizelle
“agent in authority”; - when coming to the aid a person in authority, constitutes direct assault under
a. therefore, the mere employment of serious resistance Art. 148, RPC
against such person, when coming to the aid a person in
authority, constitutes direct assault under Art. 148, RPC (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
b. therefore, the mere employment of serious resistance
against such person, when coming to the aid a person in
authority, constitutes indirect assault under Art. 149, RPC
c. nevertheless, there mere employment of serious resistance
against such person, when coming to the aid a person in
authority, does not fall within the purview of Art. 148 or 149,
RPC
d. nevertheless, there mere employment of serious resistance
against such person, when coming to the aid a person in
authority, is not punishable at all
When a person in authority is slightly slapped on the face, while in the Direct assault, in one of its qualified forms Checked. - Chrizelle
performance of uty, the offender knowing him to be so, the crime
committed is - (Leo - March 10 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E) Under RPC Art. 148:
a. direct assault, which is both qualified and complexed with
slight physical injuries Direct Assault is Qualified When:
b. direct assault, in one of its qualified forms 1. Committed with a weapon
c. direct assault 2. Offender is a public officer or employee
d. maltreatment 3. Offender lays hands upon a person in authority

Person in Authority Force Employed - Need not
be serious Intimidation/Resistance - Serious

Agent Force Employed - Must be of serious
character Intimidation/Resistance - Serious

X was among the crowd that figured in the failed “EDSA III” siege of the With the Investigating Prosecutor because, after all, he is not seeking to checked - josh
Malacanang grounds. He was caught firing an unlicensed firearm at a aggravate criminal liability for Direct Assault but only for the Homicide, which
solider perched upon a rooftop of a building somewhere within the includes that committed in the attempted stage.
Malacanang grounds, with the bullet grazing and slightly wounding the
latter. The Investigating Prosecutor agreed with him that he could not (Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
be prosecuted for Illegal Possession of Firearm, but the former opined
that he could allege the use by X of unlicensed firearm in the crime of
Direct Assault with Attempted Homicide as an aggravating
circumstance. X disagrees. With whom do you agree?

17
Thank you for your patience.
If a group of persons belonging to the armed forces makes a swift Coup D'etat. checked - josh
attack, accompanied by violence, intimidation and threat against a vital
military installation for the purpose of seizing power and taking over Coup D'etat is a crime defined under RPC Art 134-A, it is a swift attack
such installations, what crime or crimes are they guilty of? If the attack accompanied by violence, intimidation and threat against a vital military
is quelled but the leader is unknown, who shall be deemed the leader installation for the purpose of seizing power and taking over such
threof? installations. When the leader is unknown, any person who in fact directed
the others, spoke for them, signed receipts and other documents issued in
their name, has performed similar acts, on behalf of the rebels shall be
deemed a leader of such Coup D'etat as provided in RPC Art 135.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
A, a detention prisoner, was taken to a hospital for emergency medical The crime committed is Delivering Prisoners from Jail under RPC Art 156. checked - josh
treatment. His followers, all of whom were armed, went to the hospital
to take him away or to help him escape. The prison guards, seeing that The crime of Delivering Prisoners From Jail under RPC Art 156 may be
they were outnumbered and taht resistance would endanger the lives of committed by removing a prisoner confined in jail or penal institution to take
other patients, decided to allow the prisoner to be taken by his away a person from confinement with or without the active participation of
followers. What crime if any, was committed by A's followers? Why? the person released. This article applies even if the prisoner is in the hospital
when he is removed or when the offender helps his escape, because it is
considered an extension of the penal institution.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
How is Direct Assault committed? Direct Assault may be committed by: checked - josh
1. Without public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the
attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of
Sedition and Rebellion
2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force or seriously
intimidating or by seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his
agent, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on the occasion
of such performance.

(Chrizelle, Reyes)
Distinguish Direct Assault from Indirect Assault Elements of Direct Assault:
1. Without public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the
attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of
Sedition and Rebellion
2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force or seriously
intimidating or by seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his
agent, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on the occasion
of such performance.

Elements of Indirect Assault:
1.An agent of a person in authority is the victim of
any of the forms of direct assault defined in Art.
148.
2.A person comes to the aid of such authority.
3.That the offender makes use of force or
intimidation upon such person coming to the aid
of the authority or his agent.

18
Thank you for your patience.

(Chrizelle, Reyes)



Title IV – Crimes Against Public Interest
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
If the imitation of current coins is so imperfect that no one may be Yes, because the purpose of the law is also to prevent the forger from Checked. - Chrizelle
deceived, would the counterfeiter be nonetheless criminally liable? practicing his trade and honing his skills

(Hazel, May 27, 2019 Pre-Final/Make up Examination 1-F)
SU, a field agent of the National Bureau of Investigation, was charged SU is liable for falsification of public documents under Art 171, RPC Checked. - Chrizelle
with falsification of public document under par. 4, Art. 171 of the RPC, because the PDS was a public and official document and also, SU took
for making false statements in his Personal Information Sheet. A advantage of his official position when he filled up the PDS with false
Personal Data Sheet (PDS) is a requirement under the Civil Service Rules statements.
and Regulations in connection with employment in the government. The
filing of a PDS is also required in connection with promotion to a higher
position. What crime, if any, was committed by SU if he indeed made (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
those false statements in his PDS; why?
X, a clerk in the office of the municipal treasurer, whose duty was to X is guilty of falsification of private documents under Art 172 because the Checked.
enter in the book the amounts paid on vouchers presented to the voucher from a private individual is classified as a private document and X -Nico
treasurer for payment, received a voucher from a private individual. The did not take advantage of his official position when he committed the crime
voucher was not yet audited or acted upon by any public officer. The as his duty was to enter in the book the amounts paid on vouchers
amount appearing in the voucher was P25,000. X told the owner of the presented to the treasurer for payment.
voucher to return the next day for the cash. Before giving it to the
corresponding officer for auditing and approval of payment, X altered (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
the figure “3” so that the amount would read P35,000, for the purpose
of X being able to get the difference from the owner of the voucher after Falsification of Private Document under RPC Art 172 committed without
receiving payment. The treasurer promptly discovered the alteration abuse of official position by a public officer.
before actual payment. Under the circumstances, what crime was
committed by X; why? (Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
RM, as Vice-President of the MHADC, signed and certified under oath NO, RM cannot be held liable for perjury for the statements he made in the Checked. - Chrizelle
the general information sheet of MHADC. He was not, however, aware GIS which he later asserted to be erroneous in a counter-affidavit filed in
of the erroneous statements therein at the time when he signed it. It connection with the preliminary investigation of a case before the There is no Perjury through negligence or
was LDA as MHADC's corporate accountant which had solely prepared Prosecutor's Office. Because perjury cannot be committed by negligence. imprudence since the word knowingly under RPC
the 1996 GIS of MHADC. He always relied on the accuracy of LDA. He Art 183 suggests that the assertion of falsehood
said he signed it since, at that time, the LDA representative was in a (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) must be willful and deliberate
hurry to beat the deadline in submitting the same to the securities and
exchange commission (SEC). After being informed of the erroneous No, because perjury cannot be committed by negligence
statements, the LDA sent a letter to the SEC informing the latter of the
mistakes and supplying the correct information therein. The erroneous (Nico, June 2018 Finals)
statements were due to the oversight of the LDA. RM admitted that he
was negligent in not carefully reading and analyzing the statements
therein. Subsequently, RM and Others relied on the foregoing
circumstances in executing their respective counter-affidavit dated 11
June 1998, which led to their prosecution for perjury. Can RM be held
liable for perjury for the statements he made in the GIS, which he later
asserted to be erroneous in a counter-affidavit filed in connection with

19
Thank you for your patience.
the preliminary investigation of a case before the Prosecutor’s Office;
why?
X, Y and Z, board members of an LPG Dealers Association, passed a YES, X, Y and Z can be held liable on the basis of that agreement/resolution. Checked. - Chrizelle
board resolution, which resolved and embodied their agreement to the Because the acts of X, Y and Z constitute combination to prevent free
effect that LPG would be sold at a certain price per tank and that not competition in the market by fixing the selling price of their merchandise
one of them shall sell such merchandise at a lesser price without the which is in violation of Art. 186 (1) of the RPC.
previous consent of the others, and was simultaneously signed by them.
They jointly announced the said decision of the association in a press
statement, citing the board resolution. The agreement was not actually (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
carried out by the members, because they were promptly arrested. Can
X, Y and Z be, nevertheless, held liable for any crime under the Revised
Penal Code on the basis of that agreement/resolution; why?
What crime is committed where the offender falsifies a private Falsification of private documents under RPC Art 172 Checked. Naka-bold yung precise answer sa MCQ.
document in order to get money or property from the offender party?
Additional notes:
Falsification of a Private Document only, the deceitful purpose motivating -Nico
it serving merely as an element thereof.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
X made dollar coin of the United States of America. Is he liable for Yes, counterfeiting of coins is punishable whether it involves Philippine
counterfeiting of coins? coins or foreign coins. Article 163, paragraph 3: “Prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not to exceed 1,000, if the counterfeited coin
be currency of a foreign country.” (As amended by RA 4202)

Article 163, paragraph 3, RPC. Reyes, pages 192 and 193 (Kinds of coins the
counterfeiting of which is punished — letter c: coin of the currency of a
foreign country)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
May X, who is in possession of a counterfeit or mutilated coin, be No, such possession without intent to utter, nor connivance with the Checked. - Chrizelle
punished under the law, even if he shows that he has no intent to utter counterfeiter or mutilator, is not a crime.
the same and he is not in connivance with the counterfeiter or
mutilator? Art. 165 of RPC:
Punishable Act:
(1) Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another with intent to
utter the same knowing that it is false or mutilated

Elements:
a) Possession
b) Intent to utter
c) Knowledge

(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
Falsification under Art 172 (1), RPC, a check being a commercial Under Art. 172(1), the action punished is falsification of public, official or
document, within the meaning of that provision. commercial document by a private individual.
A. Offender is a private individual or public officer or employee who did not
take advantage of his official position;
B. He committed any act of falsification

20
Thank you for your patience.
C. The falsification was committed in a public, official, or commercial
document or letter of exchange

Source: Finals Reviewer made by Marga (2016-2017)

Additional Notes:
Falsification of Commercial Document under RPC Art 172(1) a check being a
Commercial Document within the meaning of that provision

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
Y submitted a Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net worth (SALN) for No, it is imperative first to show which statement (the SALN or the ITR) was
year XXXX, which appears to contain statements contradicting those false by other evidence than the contradictory statements, in light of which
stated in his Income Tax Return (ITR), also for year XXXX. Both the SALN they may be both true, both false, one false and the other true, not to
for year XXXX and the ITR for year XXXX were sworn statements. Can Y, if mention partial truths and partial falsehoods, in one or the other. (Question
prosecuted for perjury, be convicted merely on his sworn contradictory No. 12, Padilla Midterms, January 19, 2012)
statements? (SALN for year XXXX vs. ITR for year XXXX)?
A. Offender is a private individual or public officer or employee who did not
take advantage of his official position;

Additional notes:
Two contradictory sworn statements are not sufficient to convict of perjury.
The prosecution must prove which of the two statements is false, and must
show that statement to be false by other evidence than the contradictory
statement.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
XX was a disbursing officer of the Bureau of Lands. He was a public "He is liable for falsification under Art. 172, because although the travel
official. XX's functions as disbursing officer did not include the duty to expense voucher falsified was a public document, XX could not be said to
make, prepare or otherwise intervene in the preparation of the falsified have taken advantage of official position claiming it.
travel expense voucher. His function was only to pay payees of treasury No. 9 of the Samplex (Supplemental Examination) for 1E dated 10 March
warrants and other cash vouchers or payrolls. Nonetheless, he took the 2015
liberty of intervening in the preparation of a falsified travel expense
voucher. Additional notes:
a. What is the nature of a travel expense voucher prepared in the The crime committed Falsification of Private Document under RPC Art 172
office of the Bureau of Lands? because it was not committed with abuse of official position by a public
b. Can it be held that XX took advantage of his position in the officer because X was neither: 1. had the duty to make or prepare or
government in committing the crime of falsification and that he otherwise intervene in the preparation of the document 2. had official
should, therefore, be held liable under Art. 171, RPC? custody of the document which he falsifies.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

Checked
-Nico
The President of the Philippines left to his secretary a signature in blank Falsification under RPC Art 172
，With instructions to type above his signature the usual form of

21
Thank you for your patience.
appointment for Municipal Trial Court judge in favor of X. M stole from Falsification under Art 172, RPC, whether M is a public officer or a private
the desk of the secretary the paper with the signature of the President in individual.
blank and wrote a document over it，making the President liable to him (SAMPLEX MIDTERM JANUARY 19, 2012)
for a sum of money. What crime was committed by M? (Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
A resolution was under consideration by a Sangguniang Bayan X took it YES, but this one is of type punishable under 171 or 172, RPC, as the case Checked. - Chrizelle
from the table of the Sangguniang Secretary and counterfeiters or may be. (SAMPLEX Finals June 2018)
forged the signatures of the Sanggunianf Secretary and the Municipal It is not punished under RPC Art 170 of
Mayor thereon to make it appear that it was passed and approved. Is Falsification of Legislative Documents because the
this falsification of legislative document? -Nico falsification contemplated in RPC Art 170 I an act
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019) of falsification that changes the meaning of the
resolution. Other acts of falsification, even in
legislative documents, are punished in either RPC
Art 171 or 172.
A was in charge of preparing the payroll in the Office of the Governor of Yes, but not under Art 171, RPC, because the payroll never became official Checked. - Chrizelle
Cavite. When the payroll for the the month of March was presented to without the signature of the governor.
the governor for signature, he noticed that the name of X was included
as janitor in that office when, in fact, x was not employed in that office. (SAMPLEX Finals June 2018)
Instead of signing it, the governor sent the payroll to the provincial
prosecutor for appropriate action. For making a false statement in a -Nico
narration of facts, the prosecutor accused A of falsification. Is A liable for (Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
falsification?
Can the crime of falsification of private document be committed through No, because in the absence of actual damage, falsification of private Checked. - Chrizelle
reckless imprudence if there is no actual damaged cause? document can only be committed with intent to cause such damage.
(SAMPLEX Finals June 2018)

-Nico

Additional notes:
No. There is no falsification of private document through reckless
imprudence.- Since in falsification of a private document, there is at least
intent to cause damage, that is, there must be malice, and falsification
through imprudence implies lack of such intent or malice, there is no such
crime as falsification of a private document through negligence or reckless
imprudence.
Reyes (2012) P. 239 , Reyes (2017) P.242
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
The President of the Philippines left to his secretary a signature in blank, Falsification under Art. 172, RPC, whether M is a public officer or a private Checked. - Chrizelle
with instructions to type above his signature the usual form of individual.
appointment for Municipal Trial Court judge in favor of X. M stole from
the desk of the secretary the paper with the signature of the President in - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
blank and wrote a document over it, making the President liable to him
for a sum of money. What crime was committed by M?
What is the crime committed by a person who falsifies a check drawn Falsification of commercial document under Art. 172(1), RPC, a check being Checked. - Chrizelle
against the Philippine National Bank? a commercial document, within the meaning of that provision.

(Pre-Final/Make Up Examination, May 27, 2019 1-F)
X, who was buying merchandise, offered in payment of the same, a Consummated, acceptance of the bogus bill upon such offer not being an Checked. - Chrizelle
bogus 100-peso bill, knowing it to be falsified. The owner of the element of its use.

22
Thank you for your patience.
merchandise discovered that the 100-peso bill was bogus and refused to
accept it. Is X liable for attempted, frustrated, or consummated use of (Pre-Final/Make Up Examination, May 27, 2019 1-F)
falsified money bill?
X made a dollar coin of the United States of America. Is he liable for Yes, counterfeiting of coins is punishable whether it involves Philippine Checked. - Chrizelle
counterfeiting of coins? coins or foreign coins

(Pre-Final/Make Up Examination, May 27, 2019 1-F)
X was surprised by a policeman mutilating a 1-peso silver coin, which No, mutilation of coins, unlike counterfeiting thereof, applies only to coins
was in circulation before World War II but has been withdrawn from that are in circulation
circulation after liberation. Would X be liable for the crime of mutilation
of coins? (Pre-Final/Make Up Examination, May 27, 2019 1-F)
May X who is in possession of a counterfeit or mutilated coin, be No, such possession without intent to utter, nor connivance with the
punished under the law, even if he shows that he has no intent to utter counterfeiter or mutliator is not a crime.
the same and he is not in connivance with the counterfeiter or mutilator
(Pre-Final/Make Up Examination, May 27, 2019 1-F)
When is possession of counterfeit treasury bank or note a crime? When proof of knowledge of its falsity concurs with intent to utter Checked. - Chrizelle
a. When proof of knowledge of its falsity concurs with intent to
utter (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
b. When there is proof of knowledge of its falsity, regardless of
the existence of any intent to utter
c. When there is intent to utter and proof of its falsity
d. When there is proof of intent to utter, knowledge of its falsity
being presumed from possession
X is the distributor/retailer of petroleum products imported from a Yes, both of them are liable under Art. 186(3) RPC, since they combined Checked. - Chrizelle
foreign country by Y. Taking advantage of the fall in the supply of and conspired to increase the market price of a merchandise or object of
petroleum products arising from the mere possibility of a blockade in commerce imported into the Philippines.
the straits of Hormuz, Y and X agreed to fix higher prices for said
petroleum products which X purchased from Y and X would, in turn, - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
distribute/resell the same petroleum products at higher prices, thereby
increasing the market price of such petroleum products. Are X and Y
liable for any crime under the Revised Penal Code?
X, a multi-billionaire, invited all cement manufacturers and offered them No, since the proposal was rejected, there was no agreement to Checked. - Chrizelle
a certain price plus a share in the profits if all of them would sell their monopolize and combine in restraint of trade that violates Art. 186, RPC.
manufactured cement to him only. X’s manufacturers refused and
rejected the offer of X. May X be held criminally liable under the Revised - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
Penal Code for his attempt to monopolize the sale and exportation of
cement?
X, Y, and Z, board members of an LPG Dealers Association, passed a Yes, the acts of X, Y, and Z constitute a combination to prevent free checked - josh
Board Resolution, which resolved and embodied their agreement to the competition in the market by fixing the selling price of their merchandise,
effect that LPG would be sold at a certain price per tank and that not in violation of Art. 186(1), RPC.
one of them shall sell such merchandise at lesser price without the
previous consent of the others, and was simultaneously signed by them. - Erin (1-D Midterm Exam 01/19/12)
They jointly announced the said decision of the association in a press
statement, citing the board resolution. The agreement was not actually
carried out by the members, because they were promptly. arrested. Can
X, Y, and Z be, nevertheless, held liable under the Revised Penal Code on
the basis of that agreement/resolution?

23
Thank you for your patience.
To be punishable, the uttering of mutilated coins Must always be in connivance with its mutilators or importers RPC Art. 165 - Selling of False or Mutilated Coin,
a. Must always be in connivance with its mutilators or importers Without Connivance: Actually uttering or mere
b. Need not be in connivance with mutilators or importers (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) intent to utter false or mutilated coin, knowing it
c. Must be done by the mutilators or importers themselves to be false or mutilated, is a crime under Art. 165,
d. Must always be in connivance with its mutilators or Need not be in connivance with mutilators or importers. even if the offender was not in connivance with
importers, if not done by the mutilators or importers (Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation; Honey, also in 1E the counterfeiter or mutilator.
themselves Supplemental Exam 2015) -Explanation of Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation
(Chrizelle)
A lawyer who knowingly introduces in a judicial proceeding a false Should be prosecuted for use of a false certificate under Art. 175, RPC Checked. -Chrizelle
medical certificate, to support a motion for postponement of a hearing
a. Should be prosecuted for use of falsified documents under (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
Art. 172, 2nd paragraph, RPC
b. Should be prosecuted for use of a false certificate under Art.
175, RPC
c. Should be prosecuted for offering false testimony in evidence
under Art. 184, RPC
d. Should be prosecuted for use of falsified document in a
judicial proceeding
In defining the crime of counterfeiting of coins under Art. 163, RPC, the Even coins which have been withdrawn from circulation Checked. -Chrizelle
law contemplates, as possible subject of counterfeiting
a. Only coins which are of legal tender RPC Art. 163 applies to Philippine coins, Foreign
b. Even coins which have been withdrawn from circulation (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) Coins, and Coins withdrawn from Circulation.
c. Only coins that have been withdrawn from circulation
d. Local coins, as distinguished from foreign coins This does not require that the coins counterfeited
be legal tender.

Damage or intent to cause damage is immaterial in incurring criminal In transactions and proceedings other than judicial Oh no mag kaiba ang nasa samplex - Nico
liability for the introduction of falsified documents
a. In judicial proceedings (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E) Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation answer:
b. In any transaction In Judicial Proceedings
c. In transactions and proceedings other than judicial In Judicial proceedings -Chrizelle
d. In all official proceedings
(Nico, June 2018 Finals; Honey, also in 2015 Supplemental Exam 1E)
X, coin collector, was surprised by Policeman mutilating a P1 silver coin, No, Mutilation of Coins, unlike counterfeiting thereof, applies only to coins
which was in circulation before WW2 but has been withdrawn from that are in circulation.
circulation after liberation. Would X be liable for crime of Mutilation of
Coins? (Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
In terms of penalty, the Art. 161, RPC, regards the crime of Forging the As a crime as serious as Homicide, which is penalized with reclusion
Great Seal of the Government of the Philippines - temporal.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
In terms of stage of execution, Falsification -- Only has a Consummated Stage.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)

RPC Art. 172 - Falsification by Private Individual and Use of Falsified
Document:

24
Thank you for your patience.
Falsification is consummated the moment the genuine document is altered
OR the moment the false document is executed. It is immaterial that the
offender did not achieve his objective.

For purposes of falsification under RPC Art 171, when is a public officer RPC Art 171
considered to have taken advantage of his official position? 1. He has the duty to make or prepare or otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document
2. He has the official custody of the document which he falsifies.

(Chrizelle, Reyes)
When is the appropriate time to file a criminal action for false testimony The filing of a criminal action for false testimony against a defendant in a
against a defendant in a criminal case; why? criminal case presuppose a final judgment of conviction or acquittal in the
basic case as a prerequisite to the actionability of the crime of false
testimony against the defendant. Because the penalty depends upon the
sentence of the defendant against whom false testimony was given.

(Ge-An, Reyes)

Title V – Crimes Against Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs
Samplex Question Answer



Title VI – Crimes Against Public Morals
Samplex Question Answer
A mendicant may be punished for vagrancy under Art. 202 of the RPC for Mendicancy under Sec. 5, YES.
Pres. Dec. No 1563 because a Mendicant is always a vagrant. A mendicant is always a vagrant, although a vagrant only becomes a mendicant if begging is used as
means of living.

(Chrizelle, Reyes)

Of course, a gambler always gambles for money; therefore, playing for money is a necessary element NO
in gambling Playing for money is not a necessary element of gambling (U.S. v. Rafael), under P.D. No. 1602,
wagers in gambling may consist of money, articles of value or representatives of value

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
One who gives away indecent literature to another person obviously violates Art. 201, par. 4, RPC, NO
which penalizes, aside from sale or exhibition thereof, the giving away of articles offensive to morals Giving away indecent literature to one person does not violate Art. 201, par. 4, RPC (PEOPLE v.
TEMPOKO); "giving away" is to be understood as "distribution"

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
Absence of visible means of support is an element of the definition of a "vagrant" and is, therefore, NO
an essential ingredient of all types of vagrancy Absence of visible means of support is essential only in first and second types of vagrancy; it is not
particularly required in "loitering in places belonging to another without lawful or justifiable cause,
not falling under the (first four) categories.

(Chrizelle, Reyes)

25
Thank you for your patience.
A person who provides for the gratification of the lust of another can be punished both as a "pimp" False.
under Art. 202, RPC and as "procurer" under Rep. Act No. 7610.
A pimp is liable under Art. 202, RPC (U.S. v. Cruz); only a “procurer” in child prostitution is liable
under Sec. 5, RA 7610.
Because prostitution denotes habitual sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct for money or profit, False.
there is no such thing as a mere attempt to commit prostitution
The proposition is true under Art. 202, RPC, but not under R.A. 7610 where habituality is not an
element of the definition of child prostitution and the crime may be committed by mere attempt to
commit child prostitution as therein defined, although the criminal liability does not attach to the
child prostitute but to others responsible therefor.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
Charity to mendicants may as well begin and end at home, because an act of charity to mendicants in NO
public places is punishable by law Other acts of charity in public places than giving alms directly to mendicants, as well as giving alms
through organized agencies qualified under Sec. 6, P.D. No. 1563 does not violate the mendicancy
law.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
Since exploited minors who are mendicants are more of victims than offenders, giving alms to them is NO
expected by Pres. Dec. No. 1563 from the scope of the offense therein defined as "abetting Giving alms directly to exploited minors on public roads, sidewalks, parks and bridges, constitute
mendicacy" abetting mendicacy under P.D. No 1563.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
An adult prostitute is in a better situation than a child prostitute in that to convict an adult prostitute, NO
the element of habituality must be proved, whereas child prostitution does not require proof of A child prostitute is treated as a victim, not as an offender; under Sec. 5, R.A. No. 7610, child
habituality prostitutes are deemed "children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse"

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
A female prostitute may be prosecuted both under the RPC and under R.A. 7610, whereas a male An adult male prostitute may be punished as a vagrant under Art. 202, RPC, although not liable under
prostitute, being excluded from the definition of a prostitute under Art. 202, RPC, is liable only under R.A. 7610, if a child, being regarded therein as a victim, rather than as an offender.
R.A. 7610, which makes no distinction as to the gender of the prostitute
(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
Mere possession of obscene articles is not a crime. YES.

Mere possession is not one of the acts penalized under Art. 201, RPC

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C) #52
For liability to attach in connection with authorizing obscene literature, publication thereof, with False.
knowledge of the author, is essential, whereas the publisher is made liable merely for the act of
publishing the obscene literature. In the publication of obscene literature, it is the editor, not necessarily the publisher, who is expressly
made liable.
A person, with visible means of support, who loiters even in a pace belonging to another, even YES
without a justifiable cause, cannot be accused of vagrancy Formerly, this form of vagrancy did not require the element of "absence of visible means of support";
hence, having visible means of support was immaterial to this type of vagrancy. However, vagrancy
has been decriminalized under R.A. No. 10158.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)

26
Thank you for your patience.
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C) #53
A person with visible means of support, who loiters in a place belonging to another, even without a True. Formerly, this form of vagrancy did not require the element of “absence of visible means of
justiciable cause, cannot be accused of vagrancy. support”; hence, having visible means of support was immaterial to this type of vagrancy. However,
vagrancy have been decriminalized under R.A. No. 10158

(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)




Title VII – Crimes Committed by Public Officers
Samplex Question Answer
The prima facie presumption of malversation under the last paragraph b) Arises only if there was no issue as to the accuracy, correctness, and Checked. - Ellaine
of Art. 217 of the Revised Penal Code regularity of the audit findings and if the fact that funds are missing is
indubitably established before such demand is made
a) arises only if there was no issue as to the accuracy, (Hazel, Final Exams March 23, 2013, 1D)
correctness, and regularity of the audit findings, even if the (Pre-Final/Make Up Examination 1-F 2019)
fact that funds are missing is not indubitably established
before such demand is made Additional info:
b) arises only if there was no issue as to the accuracy, The prima facie presumption under Art. 217 of the Revised Penal Code arises
correctness, and regularity of the audit findings and if the only if there was no issue as to the accuracy, correctness and regularity of
fact that funds are missing is indubitably established before the audit findings and if the fact that funds are missing is indubitably
such demand is made established. Thus, where the amount of shortage was disputed because the
c) arises even if there was an issue as to the accuracy, audit team failed to consider certain records and past transactions of the
correctness and regularity of the audit findings, as long as the accused and there was an incomplete and haphazard compliance with the
facts that funds are missing is indubitably established before Manual of Instruction to Treasurers and Auditors and Other Guidelines in the
such demand is made examination made by the audit team, the said prima facie presumption does
d) always arises upon the failure to have the amount of public not rise. The rule, however, does not apply where the accused admitted the
funds or property forthcoming after demand shortage and although the audit examination was admittedly replete with
errors in determining the correct amount of shortage, the audit team was
finally able to determine it and, more importantly, they examined all records
available, and the errors were committed due to the accused’s simulated
entries and not because pertinent documents were disregarded while, in
fact, the accused failed to point any item or record that the audit team
overlooked which would have altered his final accountability but merely
raised the excuse of having utilized the shortage to disburse cash advances
to the municipality’s employees and officials. (Deuro v. People and
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162212, Jan 30, 2007)
In the felony of maltreatment of prisoners, the lower penalty prescribed c. If maltreatment arises from the imposition of punishment not authorized
in Art. 235, Rev. Pen. Code, is imposable by the regulations or by inflicting such punishment in a cruel and humiliating
manner
a) if the purpose of the maltreatment is to extort a confession; (Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)
b) if the purpose of the maltreatment is simply to obtain
information (Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
c) if maltreatment arises from the imposition of punishment
not authorized by the regulations or by inflicting such
punishment in a cruel and humiliating manner

27
Thank you for your patience.
d) if maltreatment is committed by inflicting punishment that
are authorized by the regulations but in a cruel and
humiliating manner
For purposes of ascertaining whether or not the crime of unlawful c) the “temporary prohibition” against the appointment of losing candidates
appointment was committed in particular as regards the element that to elective position is not synonymous with absence or lack of legal
the person appointed “lacked legal qualification” qualification
(Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)
a) the term “legal qualification” must be understood as
contemplating as well, in addition to other legal A persons who possessed the required legal qualifications for a position may
qualifications, the one (1) year prohibition on appointment be temporary disqualified for appointment to a public position by reason of
as provided for in Sec. 6, Art. IX-B of the Constitution and the one year prohibition on losing candidates. Upon the other hand, one
Sec. 94[b] of the Local Government Code, mandating that a may not be temporarily disqualified for appointment, but could not be
candidate who lost in any election shall not, within on year appointed as he lacked any or all of the required legal qualifications imposed
after elections, be appointed to any office in the by law. (People v. Sandigan Bayan and Villapando)
Government;
b) the “temporary prohibition” against the appointment of (Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
losing candidates to elective positions can be considered as
equivalent to lack of qualification on the part of the
appointee
c) the “temporary prohibition” against the appointment of
losing candidates to elective position is not synonymous with
absence or lack of legal qualification
d) a person may not be considered as possessing the required
legal qualification is for a position if he is temporarily
disqualified for appointment to a public position by reason of
the one year prohibition imposed on losing candidates
As regards private persons, the crime of infidelity in the custody or d) all the foregoing cases Checked. - Ellaine
prisoners may be committed with respect to: (Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)
a) prisoners serving sentence by final judgment confided to (Pre-Final/Make Up Examination 1-F 2019)
their custody, who escape with their connivance or consent
or through their negligence
b) detention prisoners confided to their custody, who escape
with their connivance or consent or through their negligence;
c) persons merely under arrest, who had been confided to their
custody and who escape with their connivance or consent or
through their negligence;
d) all the foregoing cases.
Can restitution, payment, or reimbursement be asserted as a defense No, restitution, payment or reimbursement cannot be asserted as a defense
against a prosecution for malversation of public funds or property? against a prosecution for malversation of public funds or property. It has
been held in the case of People v Velasquez that the return of the money by
the accused only amounts to a mitigating circumstance; it cannot be used to
exempt one from criminal liability. Restitution, payment or reimbursement
cannot be used to exonerate one from being criminally liable for
malversation but that can be used to mitigate his liability. If restitution,
payment or reimbursement is allowed to be used as a defense, it would be
easy for one to be absolved of malversation by simply doing those things
despite the fact that the accused had already malversed public funds or
property to the detriment of public interest

28
Thank you for your patience.
(A. Bernardo 2015 exam answer)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)
How is indirect bribery committed? A public officer accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
(SAMPLEX FINALS MARCH 2014)

-Nico

Additional Notes:
Art. 211 states that Indirect Bribery is committed by a public officer (or
employee) who shall accept gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)
When may private persons be held guilty of the crime of infidelity in the Art 225. When a public officer conveys custody of a prisoner or person under
custody of prisoners? arrest to a private person, and said prisoner escapes with the consent, or
due to the negligence of the private person.

Reyes p. 476

Additional: Prisoners serving sentence, Detention prisoners, and Persons
merely under arrest are included.
(BASED SA SAMPLEX)

-Nico
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)

The private person may indeed commit this crime in relation to a prisoner
(whether a convict or merely in detention) or a person under arrest, who
escape with their connivance or consent through their negligence
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)


When may a public officer who is not in charge of public funds or "It must be stressed that a public officer who is not in charge of public funds
property by virtue of his official position, or even a private individual, be or property by virtue of her official position, or even a private individual,
held liable for malversation? may be liable for malversation or illegal use of public funds or property if
such public officer or private individual conspires with an accountable
public officer to commit malversation or illegal use of public funds or
property."

#73, True or False Reviewer for Section 1-C (no date)

You may also cite jurisprudence:
People vs. Pajaro (G.R. No. 167860-65); Barriga vs. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No.
161784-86); Zoleta vs. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 185224)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)
Where the municipal mayor never denied that he received checks YES. According to the LGC, municipal mayors are chief executives of their
representing disallowed cash advances and he, in fact, admitted that respective municipalities,. Public officers are accountable if they, as part of
the disallowed cash advances were made under his authority, and that their duties, receive public funds or property which they are bound to
he was the payee of the checks and received them, may it be contended account but fail to do so. In this case, it is clear that the municipal mayor
received and had possession of (and consequently was accountable for) the

29
Thank you for your patience.
that such municipal mayor is an accountable public officer for purposes cash advances. Such a municipal mayor is undeniably an accountable officer.
of applying Art. 217, RPC, on malversation? Thus, as an accountable officer, he is obliged to liquidate the cash advances.
If the cash advances were disallowed, he is bound to return the same to the
Government (Frias vs. People)
SAMPLEX. Crim 2-1D (True or False)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)
What consideration may serve as basis to differentiate estafa with The nature of the funds or property involved as public or private.
abuse of confidence from malversation?
Source: Midterms Exam 1E 2016, Part 3 , No. 3

Additional Notes:
Art 217: Acts punishable in malversation (Reyes, p445)
1. Appropriating public funds or property
2. Taking or misappropriating the same
3. Consenting, like thru abandonment or negligence, permitting any other
person to take such public funds or property
4. Being otherwise guilty of misappropriation or malversation of such funds
or property

Art 315: Estafa with abuse of confidence (Reyes, p813). Elements:
1. Money, goods, or other personal property be received by the offender in
trust or commission, or for administration, or any other obligation involving
duty to make delivery of, or to return the same
2. There's misappropriation or conversion of such money or property by
offender, or denial on his part of such receipt
3. Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of
another
4. and there is demand made by the offended party to the offender
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)
Where the accused concedes (1) that he is a public officer; (2) that he True.
has custody or control of public funds or property by reason of the
duties of his office and (3) that the funds or property involved are public REASON: The practice of disbursing public funds under the “vale” system is a
funds or property for which he is accountable, he cannot avoid criminal clear case of an accountable officer consenting to the improper or
liability for malversation of public funds by claiming that he used the unauthorized use of public funds by other persons, which is punishable by
missing funds for disbursement of cash advances, and not for his law. To tolerate such a practice is to give a license to every disbursing officer
personal use, albeit no vale slips evidencing the cash advances were to conduct a lending operation with the use of public funds. Besides, even
presented by him. assuming that accused’s defense could be acceptable, no vale slips
evidencing the cash advances were presented by him. Thus, the evidence in
this case is thoroughly inconsistent with the accused’s claim of innocence.
(Duero v. People and Sandiganbayan)

(Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
In the felony of maltreatment of prisoners, when is the lower penalty If maltreatment arises from the imposition of punishment not authorized
prescribed in Art. 235, Rev. Pen. Code, imposable? by the regulations, or by inflicting such punishment in a cruel and
humiliating manner.
Samplex compilation by Marga

(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)

30
Thank you for your patience.
In illegal use of public funds or property, what is the legal effect of the Material in fixing the penalty for the said felony
existence of damage or embarrassment to the public service? (from samplex compiled by marga)

(Copied from Quizzler 1-F)

False. It is not entirely immaterial because although not element of a crime
the existence of such damage or embarrassment to the public service
determines the imposable penalty under ART. 220, RPC
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

Where the Office of the Prosecutor miserably incurred some delay in To file an administrative disciplinary action against the erring public officials
the filing of the information after the City Prosecutor had approved the (People v. Bautista).
recommendation of the investigating prosecutor to file the information,
the appropriate course of action to take for the offended party being (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
deprived of his right to vindicate a wrong purportedly inflicted on him (MM, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
by the mere expediency of a prosecutor not filing the proper
information in due time would be
a. to prosecute such prosecutor for bungling or delay in the
prosecution of a case under Sec. 92 of R.A. No. 9165
b. to prosecute the prosecutor for malicious delay in the
administration of justice under Art. 207, RPC
c. to prosecute such prosecutor under Art. 208, RPC for
dereliction of duty
d. to file an administrative disciplinary action against the erring
public officials
Offenses punishable under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act However, proceedings for forfeiture of unlawfully-acquired wealth are Checked. - Ellaine
prescribe in 15 years imprescriptible.
a. however, proceedings for forfeiture of unlawfully-acquired
wealth are imprescriptible (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
b. nevertheless, the availability of forfeiture proceedings is
subject to the provisions of the Civil Code, since it refers to Sec. 11 Laws on prescription. The laws concerning acquisitive prescription
civil liability arising from the crime and limitation of actions cannot be invoked by, nor shall benefit the
c. therefore, the passage of such period of time from respondent, in respect of any property unlawfully acquired by him. (RA No.
acquisition by a public officer of an amount of money and/or 1379)
property manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other
lawful income, would be a bar to proceedings for the (Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C) #57
forfeiture thereof
d. therefore, forfeiture of unlawfully-acquired wealth, being an
accessory penalty, cannot be imposed where criminal liability
has been extinguished by prescription
In illegal use of public funds or property, the existence of damage or Material in fixing the penalty for the said felony Checked. - Ellaine
embarrassment to the public service is (Pre-Final/Make-Up Examination May 27, 2019 1-F)

There is indirect bribery where: A public officer accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office. Checked. - Ellaine
a. gifts are given to a public officer’s spouse, or relative by
affinity or consanguinity within the third civil degree, rather (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
than directly to the public officer himself, who agrees in
consideration thereof to perform an act, whether

31
Thank you for your patience.
constituting a crime or not in connection with the
performance of his official duties
b. gifts are sought by the person named in a., rather than by
the public officer himself, who is persuaded or influenced by
such persons to perform an act whether constituting a crime
or not, in connection with the performance of his official
duties
c. a public officer accepts gifts through an intermediary,
dummy or nominee and agrees to perform an act whether
constituting a crime or not, in connection with the
performance of his official duties
d. a public officer accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his
office
When a person caught in the act of selling prohibited drugs to grade FALSE. Under Art. 211-A on “qualified bribery,” if any public officer is
school students succeeds in inducing the arresting officer with “grease entrusted with law enforcement and he refrains from arresting or
money” to set him free, such person is guilty of corruption of a public prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion
official while the arresting officer is guilty of qualified bribery, but both perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or
are subject to the same penalty of reclusion perpetua to death present, he shall suffer the penalty for the offense which was not
prosecuted. If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or
present, he shall suffer the penalty of death. Under Art. 212 on “corruption
of public officials.” the same penalties imposed upon the officer corrupted,
except those of disqualification and suspension, shall be imposed upon any
person who shall have made the offers or promise or given the gifts or
presents as described in the preceding articles. Under sec. 4 of R.A. 9165,
the maximum penalty [death] shall be imposed if the “victim is a minor”)

Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C

A barangay official who fails to act or abate a gambling house or place in YES
his jurisdiction may be punished under Art. 208, RPC, for malicious Subject to proof of malice and deliberate intent to favor said violators of
tolerance the gambling law. He is additionally liable under P.D. No. 1602 which
makes it his specific duty to act or abate a gambling house or place in his
jurisdiction and imposes criminal liability upon him for failure to do so

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C) #51
Where a protracted audit became necessary because of accused’s F.
confusing entries in his Books of Account, his subsequent absence, and
the disappearance of some books under his custody, so much so that it REASON: It would be proper to reject those allegations on the validity of the
had to be the bookkeeper who had to turn over the documents, and the audit. In the instant case, the accused admitted the shortage. While the
erroneous computation initially arrived at by the audit team was caused audit examination was admittedly replete with errors in determining the
by the simulated entries made by accused himself but, nevertheless, the correct amount of shortage, the audit team finally determined it to be
audit team finally determined it to be P46,602.54, the audit team having P46,602.54. More importantly, they examined all records available. To
explained the computations adequately and the items in the shortage repeat, the errors were committed due to the accused’s simulated entries
having been sufficiently discussed and explained, and, in fact, the and not because pertinent documents were disregarded. In fact, the accused
accused did not question the items of shortage but, at best, he merely failed to point any item or record that the audit team overlooked which
offered an explanation for the missing funds, raising the excuse of would have altered his final accountability. He merely raised the excuse of
having utilized the shortage to disburse cash advances to the having utilized the shortage to disburse cash advances to the municipality’s

32
Thank you for your patience.
municipality’s employees and officials, the accused can correctly argue employees and officials. Thus, the presumption stands. (Duero v. People and
that the presumption, as provided under Article 217, last paragraph, Sandiganbayan)
cannot arise in this case because the audit conducted by the Special
Audit Team was irregular, incomplete, and inaccurate and, therefore, MM, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C
in effect, the alleged shortage was not established.
During the May 11, 1998 elections, V ran for Municipal Mayor of San No, the Prosecution cannot rest its case for unlawful appointment solely
Vicente, Palawan. T (now deceased), a relative of V’s wife, ran for on the assertion that T lacked the required legal qualification by reason of
Municipal Mayor of Kitcharao, Agusan del Norte. V won while T lost. losing in the May 11, 1998 election. Temporary prohibition is not
Thereafter, on July 1, 1998, V designated T as Municipal Administrator synonymous with absence or lack of legal qualification. Two scenarios are
of the Municipality of San Vicente, Palawan. On February 4, 2000, V and possible: (1) a person has all the legal qualifications but is temporarily
T were charged with violation of Article 244 of the Revised Penal Code disqualified because of the Constitutional prohibition on losing candidates;
(unlawful appointment) before the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman and (2) a person is not temporarily prohibited but is lacking on the
for Luzon. The complaint was resolved against V and T. However, the requirements prescribed by the law. Hence, the case for unlawful
prosecution did not allege in the Information, much less prove, that appointment will not prosper on such contentions by the prosecution.
Mayor V’s appointee, T, lacked any of the qualifications imposed by law
on the position of Municipal Administrator. Nevertheless, is not (Ellaine, March 27, 2015 Finals, 1E)
disputed that there is a one (1) year prohibition on appointments as
provided for in Sec. 6, Art. IX-B of the Constitution and Sec. 94(b) of the
Local Government Code, mandating that a candidate who lost in any
election shall not, within one year after such election, be appointed to
any office in the Government. Can the Prosecution rest its case for
unlawful appointment solely on the assertion that since T lost in the
May 11, 1998 election, he necessarily lacked the required legal
qualifications for the position of Municipal Administrator?
The penalty for infidelity in the custody of documents by removal, False. The penalty for this crime depends only upon the seriousness of the
concealment or destruction thereof may alternatively depend on the damage caused to third persons parties or to the public interest and takes
seriousness of damage caused to third parties, the serious of damage no account of the value of the documents or papers involved
cause of public interest, or the value of the document or papers
removed, concealed or destroyed. (Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
An arresting officer who in the process of making the arrest, maltreats False. To be a “prisoner”, the victim must have been booked for detention or
the person arrested for a crime in order to extort information from him placed in jail even for a short while, not one who is being merely arrested.
regarding his responsibility for said crime commits the crime of
maltreatment of prisoners. (Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

In line with the general scheme of penalties under RPC providing lower False. The penalty for malversation depends upon the amount involved, and
penalties for culpable felonies or criminal negligence, the gravity of the remains the same whether the crime is committed with malice or through
penalty of malversation depends on whether it was committed with negligence or imprudence.
malice or merely through negligence or imprudence.
(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

In the crime of conniving with or consenting to evasion, the penalty is False. Art. 223 RPC, provides the following penalties: (1) Prision correccional
the same whether the escapee is a detention prisoner or one in its medium and maximum periods and temporary special disqualifications
sentenced by final judgement. in its maximum period to perpetual special disqualification if the fugitive
shall have been sentenced by final judgement to any penalty; (2) By prision
coreccional in its maximum period and temporary special disqualification, in
the case the fugitive shall not have been finally convicted but only held as a
detention prisoner for any crime of violation of law or municipal ordinance.

33
Thank you for your patience.
(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
When a single act of malversation involves the misappropriation by an False. To constitute “plunder”, the accumulated ill-gotten wealth of at least
offender who is an accountable public officer, whether acting alone or 50M must not be a result of a single act, but of series or combination of
in conspiracy with others, of public funds or property in the amount of criminal acts mentioned in section 1(b) RA No. 7080
not less than PHP50 million, the same is no longer covered by Art. 217
RPC, but is punishable solely as a crime of plunder. (Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

A person who abstracts money contained in mails delivered to the post False. Only if the “person” is a public officer, entrusted with by reason of his
office commits the crime of infidelity in the custody of documents office or having custody thereof; otherwise it could be qualified theft, as
under Art. 226, RPC, because the term “papers” as used therein, involving theft or mail matter
embraces paper money.
(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
A public officer found to have acquired unexplained wealth during his False. If in accordance with the provisions of RA 1379, a public official has
incumbency may be removed or dismissed from the service but is not been found to have been acquired during his incumbency, whether in his
per se subject to the penalties of imprisonment and/or fine prescribed name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money
in Anti-Graft and Corruption Practices Act. manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income,
that fact shall be ground for dismissal or removal.

note: baka hindi to kasama coz special law
(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

A government prosecutor, assigned to review an information previously False. Subject to proof of detriment caused to the public service by reason of
filed against 98 officers and members of the Philippine National Police, such abandonment, he could be liable for the crime of abandonment of
who succumbs to anonymous death threats before completing such office under Art. 238, RPC
assignment, resigns his position, and leaves the country before said
resignation is accepted by his superior, is not guilty of any crime but (Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
should be the object of pity and sympathy (hahaha).

An accountable public officer never convicted of malversation if there is False. To justify conviction of malversation of public funds or property, the
no direct evidence of misappropriation. prosecution has only to prove that the accused received public funds or
property, and that he could not account for them or did not have them in his
possession and could not give a reasonable excuse for their disappearance.
An accountable public officer may be convicted of malversation even if there
is no direct evidence of misappropriation, and the only evidence is that there
is a shortage in his accounts which he has not been able to explain
satisfactorily (Alejo v. People)

In malversation, all that is necessary to prove is that the defendant received
in his possession public funds; that he could not account for them and did
not have them in his possession; and that he could not give a reasonable
excuse for its disappearance. An accountable public officer may be convicted
of malversation even if there is no direct evidence of misappropriation and
the only evidence is shortage in his accounts which he has not been able to
explain satisfactorily. (Perez v. People)

Verily, an accountable public officer may be found guilty of malversation
even if there is no direct evidence of malversation because the law
establishes a presumption that mere failure of an accountable officer to

34
Thank you for your patience.
produce public funds which have come into his hands on demand by an
officer duly authorized to examine his accounts is prima facie case of
conversion. Because of the prima facie presumption in Article 217, the
burden of evidence is shifted to the accused to adequately explain the
location of the funds or property under his custody or control in order to
rebut the presumption that he has appropriated or misappropriated for
himself the missing funds. Failing to do so, the accused may be convicted
under the said provision. However, the presumption is merely prima facie
and a rebuttable one. The accountable officer may overcome the
presumption by proof to the contrary. If he adduces evidence showing that,
in fact, he has not put said funds or property to personal use, then that
presumption is at end and the prima facie case is destroyed. (Perez v.
People)


Title VIII – Crimes Against Persons
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
The Revised Penal Code treats of homicide or murder, or other offenses that might As distinct offenses from rebellion. Therefore, prosecution for
conceivably be committed in the course of rebellion, as distinct offenses from such offenses committed in the course of rebellion may always
rebellion. Therefore, prosecution for such offenses committed in the course of prosper independently of rebellion.
rebellion may always prosper independently of rebellion.
D. Either as integral elements of rebellion or as distinct offenses
a. as distinct offenses from rebellion. Therefore, prosecution for such from rebellion. Therefore, the prosecution has a choice
offenses committed in the course of rebellion may always prosper depending on evidence on hand, to prosecute such acts as
independently of rebellion. rebellion or as distinct offenses, subject to proof by the defense
b. as integral elements of rebellion. Therefore, no prosecution for such as to political motive underlying the act.
offenses committed in the course of rebellion may prosper
independently of rebellion. (Ge-An, BB June 2 2016 Finals 1E)
c. as components of a complex offense with rebellion. Therefore, the
prosecution of such offenses should always be in conjunction with
rebellion.
d. either as integral elements of rebellion or as distinct offenses from
rebellion. Therefore, the prosecution has a choice, depending on
evidence on hand, to prosecute such acts as rebellion or as distinct
offenses, subject to proof by the defense as to political motive
underlying the act.
In the process of resisting his arrest by elements of the Western Police District, “X” Direct assault with homicide and serious physical injuries.
engaged in a gun fight with them, killing one policeman, and seriously injuring two
others. -For what crime or crimes may “X” be prosecuted? -Chrizelle, BB

-Under the circumstances, “X” may be prosecuted for This is the second form of Direct Assault:
a. direct assault Without public uprising, by seriously resisting any person in
b. murder authority or any of his agents, while engaged in the performance
c. homicide with serious physical injuries of official duties, or on the occasion of such performance.
d. direct assault with homicide and serious physical injuries
General rule: Direct Assault is always complexed with material
consequences of the act.

35
Thank you for your patience.
Exception: If resulting in a light felony, the consequent crime is
absorbed.

-Chrizelle, Reyes

Insanity could not qualify the crime of rape, where it was not the result of the rape, FALSE. Insanity in such case would be an element of rape, not a
as when it was already in existence at the time of the commission of the crime. qualifying circumstance.

Undated Samplex, 1-C
Where the accused in a rape case, with the use of a 12-inch knife, has cowed his True
victim to submit to his carnal urges, the penalty prescribed by law for the offense is
reclusion perpetua to death. When the crime thus charged and proved is not REASON: Whenever the rape is committed witht he use of a
attended by any aggravating or mitigating circumstance, duly alleged and proven, deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be
the penalty that can be imposed is reclusion perpetua. reclusion perpetua to death (Art. 266-B, RPC); when there are
neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances in the
commission of the deed, the lesser penalty shall be applied. (Art.
63(2), RPC).

(Undated samplex, 1-C)
In an information charging incestuous rape, the information cannot be assailed as TRUE, well-established is the rule that force or intimidation need
defective even if it fails to allege “force and/or intimidation” not be proven in incestuous cases. The overpowering moral
influence of a father over his daughter takes the place of
violence and offer of resistance ordinarily required in rape cases
where the accused is unrelated to the victim (People v. Abulon,
G.R. No. 177473, Aug. 17, 2007)
A, with other members of the NPA, asked the people in a barrio for foodstuff, at the NO. The crime of murder committed by A and others CANNOT be
same time warning them, on pain of having their heads cut off, not to report the complexed with rebellion. Acts committed in furtherance of
presence of members of the NPA in those parts to the Philippine Army. rebellion through crimes in themselves are deemed absorbed in
Disregarding the warning, B and C denounced the members of the NPA to the local one single crime of rebellion. (Enrile v Amin)
Philippine Army Detachment, with the result that the NPA members were
ambushed by the soldiers of the Philippine Army. In retaliation for what B and C had The Hernandez Doctrine remains binding to prohibit the
done, a group of NPA members led by A (“A and others”) returned to the barrio and complexing of rebellion with any other offense committed on the
apprehended B and C, and with the hands bound to their backs, cut off their heads. occasion thereof, either as a means to its commission or as an
Then, A and his companions took everything they could use from the house of B unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion.
and C. Can A and others be convicted of murder, as a separate crime from (People v Hernandez)
rebellion? Can the crime of murder committed by A and others be complexed with
rebellion? (Ge-An, Reyes)


No, Rebellion absorbs other common crimes.
(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)


KD, who appears to be an area leader of the New People’s Army, Sparrow Unit, Yes, the crime would be classified as rebellion only because of
directed AM, CA, DR, and VB members of the NPA to go to Barrio Punti and kill one the political motive behind it which absorbs murder in
RA, who was suspected by KD to be a Philippine Army (PA) informer. All four of furtherance thereof. From the facts of the case, it is imperative
them went to the barrio of RA, AM carrying a Browning shotgun, DR a Thompson, that the crime of murder in killing RA was because of a political
CA a carbine and VB a homemade gun called Bulldog. They arrived at Punti at 9 motive which is to eliminate a suspected Philippine Army

36
Thank you for your patience.
o’clock AM and they saw RA at the river bank giving his carabao a bath. DR went to informer. Murder is only used as means for carrying out the
RA and after a while, shot him with his gun. AM also shot him with his Browning rebellion.
followed with another shot by CA, as a result of which RA fell down and died. AM
then placed on the dead body of RA a writing and drawing made by their -Chrizelle, BB
association warning the people and the PA of their activities. Thereafter, the group
returned and reported to KD that RA was already dead. After subsequent
apprehension, an information was filed by the provincial fiscal charging AM, VB and
CA of the crime of murder. After conviction for murder, AM appealed.
-Can it be contented in this appeal that the crime committed is not murder but
rebellion only? Why?

-Can it be contended, in this appeal, that the crime committed is not murder but
rebellion only?
a. No, the prosecution has a choice as to what crime to prosecute and its
theory cannot be charged or altered by the defense, especially on appeal
b. No, the conviction in the lower court being one for murder, the same
can only be affirmed or reversed on appeal;
c. Yes, the crime is rebellion in view of the political motive behind it, which
absorbs murder committed in furtherance thereof
d. No, the crime committed is in murder since the victim is a private
individual and not a member of the government forces.

What would be the outcome if X, a member of the NPA, liquidated another member No. RA 10591 Sec 28 and 29 states the unlawful acquisition,
thereof suspected of being a deep penetration agent (DPA), using an unlicensed possession of firearms and ammunition, and use of loose
firearm. May he be separately prosecuted for illegal possession of firearm firearm, in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection with
independently of a prosecution for rebellion or the common crime of murder? the crime of Rebellion or Insurrection, or attempted Coup D'etat
shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of Rebellion or
Insurrection, or attempted Coup D'etat.
119

-Chrizelle, BB
BBB and AAA were watching television in their living room when two armed men Complex Crime of Robbery with Rape
also later identified as XR and XG entered their house. They likewise ordered the Aggravating circumstance of dwelling
spouses to lie down and ask them to produce their money. BBB asked AAA to get
the money from their store which was located 20 meters away from their house. XG Under paragraph 2, Section 294 of the Revised Penal Code,
accompanied AAA from their store while XR stayed with BBB. Upon reaching the elements necessary to sustain a conviction for the complex crime
store, AAA took 5,000php and gave it to XG. While in the act of getting the money, of robbery with rape are:
XG inserted one of his hands inside AAA short pants. Afterwards, XG ordered her to 1) the taking of personal property is committed with
undress and lie down on the floor. XG also removed his pants, lay on top of AAA, violence or intimidation against persons;
and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. They went back to the house where 2) the property taken belongs to another
XG also forced AAA to hand over several pieces of jewelry. AAA immediately told 3) the taking is done with animo lucrandi (with intent to
BBB that XG had sexually abused her. What was the crime committed? profit);
4) the robbery is accompanied by rape

All these elements were established. First, appellant employed
violence against and intimidation on the person of AAA
threatening her to compel her to give him money. Second, after
taking the money, he raped her.

37
Thank you for your patience.

Under Art. 294 (1) of the Rev. Pen. Code, the penalty imposed is
reclusion perpetua to death.

People v. Ynares - Santiago, G.R. No. 171654

(Hazel, Reyes and Jurisprudence)
Even where the circumstance of relationship between an accused in a crime of rape However, such relationship can nonetheless be the basis of a civil Checked. - Ellaine
and the victim had not been properly alleged in the information, but was award of exemplary damages.
subsequently proven during trial by virtue of the testimonies of accused’s sister and
mother and his own admission, it still cannot be appreciated as a qualifying -Chrizelle, BB.
circumstance.
a) However, such relationship can nonetheless be the basis of a civil award
of exemplary damages;
b) For the same reason, such relationship cannot be the basis of a civil
award of exemplary damages;
c) Thus, if such relationship cannot be appreciated as a qualifying
circumstance, there would be no basis for a civil award of exemplary
damages;
d) Nevertheless, although not appreciated as a qualifying circumstance,
relationship may be appreciated as a generic aggravating circumstance if
proved, especially if not objected to or if arising from the accused’s own
admission, thereby serving as basis for a civil award of exemplary
damages.
Even if the accused had been charged with acts of lasciviousness for having inserted He cannot be convicted of rape by sexual assault under Art 266- Checked. - Ellaine
his finger into the genital or anal orifice of the victim, A, par. 2, because he cannot be punished for an offense grave
a) He can be convicted of rape by sexual assault under Art 266-A, par. 2, as than that which he was charged.
the former necessarily includes the latter
b) He cannot be convicted of rape by sexual assault under Art 266-A, par. 2, -Chrizelle, BB.
as the former does not necessarily include the latter
c) He can be convicted of rape by sexual assault under Art 266-A, par. 2, as Additional info:
the former is penalized less severely than the latter and both their Courts are enjoined by the primordial duty to observe
means of commission is the same constitutionally guaranteed right of the accused to be informed
d) He cannot be convicted of rape by sexual assault under Art 266-A, par. 2, of the charges against him. Certainly, courts cannot allow
because he cannot be punished for an offense grave than that which he themselves to be the ones to perpetrate the denial of accused’s
was charged right to due process. He cannot be punished for an offense
graver than that which he was charged
(People v. Fetalino, G.R. No. 1744472, June 19, 2007)
Qualified piracy where physical injury, rape, murder or homicide is committed, as a A special complex crime.
result or on the occasion of piracy, is --
a) a special complex crime -Chrizelle, BB
b) an ordinary complex crime
c) a continuing crime Punishable by reclusion perpetua to death regardless of the
d) a many-splendored crime. number of victims. (People v Siyoh)

-Chrizelle, Reyes
The information for rape against XA reads: “That on or about the 11th day of June b) XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be amended Checked. - Ellaine
2002 or prior thereto in the City of Las Pinas, PH and within the jurisdiction of this to acts of lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is

38
Thank you for your patience.
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd designs, did then and there covered under Art 266-A, par. 2 of RA 8353 because a “finger”
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commits acts of sexual assault with one BBB, a 7 constitutes an object or instrument in the contemplation of RA
year old minor, by touching and inserting his finger into her vagina against her will 8353
and consent. Under the circumstances,
a) XA can ask that the charge filed against him be amended to acts of Additional info:
lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is not covered under Art Under the present law on rape, Art 266-A of the Revised Penal
266-A, par. 2 of RA 8353 because a “finger” does not constitute an Code as amended by RA 8353 and as interpreted in People v.
object or instrument in the contemplation of RA 8353 Soriano, the insertion of one’s finger into the genital of another
b) XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be amended to acts of constitutes “rape through sexual assualt” (People v. Fetalino,
lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is covered under Art 266- G.R. No. 174472, June 19, 2007; De Castro v. Fernandez, Jr. G.R.
A, par. 2 of RA 8353 because a “finger” constitutes an object or No. 155041, February 14, 2007)
instrument in the contemplation of RA 8353
c) XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be changed against him Undated Samplex, 1-C
be amended to acts of lasciviousness instead of rape, even though the
finger is neither an instrument nor object in the contemplation of RA
8353 because, after all, rape by sexual assault necessarily includes acts
of lasciviousness
d) It is unnecessary for XA to ask that the charge filed against him be
amended to acts of lasciviousness instead of rape, even though the
“finger” is neither an instrument nor object in the contemplation of RA
8353 because acts of lasciviousness is a lesser offense than rape by
sexual assault
Where the second male of a vessel, cruising within Philippine waters, with evident Murder, because the specific intent was to vindicate a personal
premeditation and cooperating with all other members of the ship’s complement or grudge and there is evident premeditation.
crew, kills the captain of the vessel over a personal grudge, the crime is -
-Chrizelle, BB
a. mutiny in Philippine waters, which may now be committed in Philippine
waters owing to the amendment incorporated into Art. 122, Rev. Pen.
Code, by Rep. Act No. 7659
b. murder, because the specific intent was to vindicate a personal grudge
and there is evident premeditation
c. homicide only because the act was motivated by a personal grudge
d. direct assault, the captain of the vessel being deemed a person in
authority under Article 152, RPC.
“A” wanted to eliminate his political rival “B” before the election, which was about A should be prosecuted for sedition on one hand as he, together
to take place in their province. “A” had an understanding with some members of with some members of the NPA, who were engaged in
the NPa roaming the mountains of Quezon Province, whose commander was his continuing hostilities against the government, acted in
friend, to the effect that said NPA members would attack the town where “B” was conspiracy and attacked B. A should also be prosecuted for the
living and serving a municipal mayor, with the particular end in view of killing “B”. separate and individual crimes of serious physical injuries
During the attack on the said town made by the NPA members in which “A” also because of infliction of such on the person of B and the crime of
took part, “B” was seriously injured and his house was burned. Considering that the arson because of burning the house of B.
members of the NPA were engaged in continuing hostilities against the
Government and “A” was, as regards the subject incident, in conspiracy with said -Chrizelle, BB
NPA members, of what crime or crimes would you find “A” liable; why?
A is liable for Sedition on the one hand, and for all the separate
and individual crimes committed in the course thereof, namely
the Serious Physical Injuries inflicted on B and Arson, for the
burning of the house of .

39
Thank you for your patience.
X, a stranger, poisoned Y, a pregnant woman, with intent to kill her. As a Murder.
consequence, Y dies, along with the foetus in her womb. Under the circumstances,
X should be held liable for: -Chrizelle, BB
a) murder with intentional abortion
b) Murder with unintentional abortion Additional notes:
c) Murder and Abortion as 2 separate and distinct crimes Samplex: Section 1-C Part II Sample MCQ Pages 24-25 (Item# 13)
d) Murder Textbook Reference: Reyes 2017 p. 540 If the offender is not so
related to the child, the penalty corresponding to murder shll be
imposed.
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
Even if the child was expelled prematurely and deliberately were alive at birth, the True.
offense is still abortion if it dies thereafter due to the fact that a fetus with an
intrauterine life of 6 months is not viable. REASON: In the crime of infanticide, it is necessary that the chil
be born alive and be viable, that is, capable of independent
existence. However, even if the child who was expelled
prematurely and deliberately were alive at birth, the offense is
abortion due to the fact that a fetus with an intrauterine life of 6
months is not viable. (People v. Paycana, Jr.)

(MM, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
The following [are] is not a special complex crime[s] defined in relation to robbery: Robbery with frustrated homicide or murder.
a) robbery with frustrated homicide or murder;
b) robbery with rape; -Chrizelle, BB
c) robbery with homicide;
d) attempted or frustrated robbery with homicide.
Where rape is alleged and proven to have been committed with a deadly weapon It is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such
and by two persons, weapon) with the aggravating circumstance of superior strength
(there being two rapists acting in concert).
a) it is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such weapon) but
it is not necessary to consider its commission by two persons as -Chrizelle, BB
aggravating since the rape was already qualified;
b) it is considered qualified rape because it was committed by “two or Inasmuch as the four malefactor, unquestionably took advantage
more persons” and the use of deadly weapon should be appreciated as of their combined strength to overpower the two victims to
generic aggravating; consummate their objective, abuse of superiority may be
c) it is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such weapon) appreciated (People v. Soriano)
with the aggravating circumstance of superior strength (there being two But see (People v. Basas): The ruling in People vs. De Guzman
rapists acting in concert); and De la Cruz, that in rape perpetrated by three persons abuse
d) it is simply considered qualified rape because it was committed by “two of superior strength is aggravating, is not applicable to this case
or more persons”, the use of deadly weapon not being a generic because the circumstance that the rape was committed by two
aggravating circumstance and no longer necessary to further qualify or more persons was already taken into account in fixing the
rape. penalty of reclusion perpetua to death for the kind of rape (Art.
335, Revised Penal Code) Here, rape was already qualified by the
use of deadly weapon; hence, the circumstance that that two
persons committed the crime against the hapless vitim can be
appreciated as generic aggravating circumstance of abuse of
superiority

(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

40
Thank you for your patience.
The Information for Rape against XA reads: “That on or about the 11th day of June XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be amended to Checked. -Tin
2002 or prior thereto, in the City of Las Pinas, Philippines and within the jurisdiction acts of lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is covered
of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd designs, did then and under Article 266-A, paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 8353 (RA
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commits act of sexual assault with one 8353) because a “finger” constitutes an object or instrument in
[BBB], a seven (7) years old minor, by touching and inserting his finger into her the contemplation or RA 8353.
vagina against her will and consent.”
Under the circumstances, -Chrizelle, BB

a) XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be amended to acts of
lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is covered under Article
266-A, paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 8353 (RA 8353) because a
“finger” constitutes an object or instrument in the contemplation or RA
8353;
b) XA cannot ask that the charge filed against him be amended to acts of
lasciviousness instead of rape, even though the “finger” is neither an
instrument nor object in the contemplation of RA 8353 because, after
all, rape by sexual assault necessarily includes acts of lasciviousness;
c) XA can ask the charge filed against him be amended to acts of
lasciviousness instead of rape since “fingering” is not covered under
Article 266-A, paragraph 2 of Republic Act No. 8353 (RA 8353) because a
“finger” does not constitute an object or instrument in the
contemplation of RA 8353;
d) it is unnecessary for XA to ask that the chage filed against him be
amended to act of lasciviousness instead of rape, even though the
“finger” is neither an instrument nor object in the contemplation of RA
8353 because acts of lasciviousness is a lesser offense than rape by
sexual assault.
When a person in authority is slightly slapped on the face, while in the performance Direct assault, in one of its qualified forms.
of duty, the offender knowing him to be so, the crime committed is-
a. direct assault, which is both qualified and complexed with slight physical -Chrizelle, BB
injuries
b. direct assault, in one of its qualified forms
c. direct assault
d. maltreatment
X and others grabbed a 16-year old girl, dragged her to a nearby forest and there Forcible abduction with rape.
brutally ravished her. What crime/s was/were committed by X and Others? Why? -Chrizelle, BB

Complex Crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape

Forcible Abduction with Rape as defined and penalized by Art.
342 of the Revised Penal Code
Elements:
1) That the person abducted is any woman, regardless of
her age, civil status, or reputation;
2) That she is taken against her will;
3) that the abduction is with lewd designs.

Rape (as amended by R.A. 8353)

41
Thank you for your patience.
Article 266-A Rape: When and How Committed - Rape is
commited:
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
woman under the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve
(12) years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
2) By any person who, under any circumstances
mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act
of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another
person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or
object, into the genital or anal orifice of another
person.

Article 266-B Penalty
Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be
punished by reclusion perpetua to death

Whenever rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or
by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua
to death

In multiple rape, each defendant is responsible, not only for the
rape committed personally by him, but also for the rape
committed by the others, because they cooperated in the
consummation of the rape committed by the others, by acts
without which it could not have been accomplished.
(People v. Villa, G.R. L-591)

The, victim, who is a woman, was taken against her will. Physical
resistance need not be demonstrated to show that the taking
was against her will. Evidence shows that the taking was against
her will and was effected in furtherance of lewd and unchaste
designs. Such lewd designs in forcible abduction is established by
the actual rape of the victim.
(People v. Ablaneda, G.R. 131914)
(MM, Reyes and Jurisprudence)
The Information for Attempted Rape reads: “That about 1:50 in the morning or He cannot assail his conviction for unjust vexation since the Checked. - Ellaine
sometime thereafter of 13 December 1991 in Manila and within the jurisdiction of Information for attempted rape contains averments constituting
this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by forcefully covering the face of and thus justifying his conviction for unjust vexation.
MA with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects, did then and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commenced the commission of rape by -Chrizelle, BB.

42
Thank you for your patience.
lying on top of her with the intention to have carnal knowledge with her but was
unable to perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident Additional info:
other than his own spontaneous desistance, said acts being committed against her
will and consent to her damage and prejudice.” If the accused is acquitted of The information for attempted rape contains averments
attempted rape and convicted, instead, of unjust vexation “by forcefully covering constituting and thus justifying his conviction for unjust vexation,
the face of MA with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects”, (a) he a form of light coercion under Art. 287 of the Revised Penal
cannot assail his conviction for unjust vexation since the Information for Code. The afore-quoted Information states all the facts and
attempted rape contains averments constituting and thus justifying his conviction ingredients that fully apprised BS of the nature and cause of the
for unjust vexation; (b) he can assail his conviction for unjust vexation on the accusation against him, in compliance with his constitutional
ground that the Information, as thus quoted, does not allege that the complained right to be informed of the nature of the charges against him
act of covering the face of the victim with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical (Baleros, Jr. v. People, G.R. no. 138033, January 30, 2007)
caused her annoyance, irritation, torment, distress and disturbance; (c) he can
assail his conviction for unjust vexation since the crime alleged in the information,
in reality, constitutes grave coercion, which is not charged in the information; (d)
he cannot assail his conviction for unjust vexation since an accused can and
should be convicted of the crime proved to have been committed.
Acts of lasciviousness may be distinguished from attempted rape in terms of: The intent of the offender.
(a) the performance of acts of lascivious character
(b) the manner of committing the crime -Chrizelle, BB
(c) the intent of the offender
(d) the external manifestation
GA instituted a criminal complaint for the violation of the RPC, particularly Art 262, B -- It is not proper to charge Dr. RA , the urologist who
in relation to RA 7610 against respondents PA, RO, Dr. RA, and several John/Jane performed the procedure, much less the others, with the crime
Does before the OP of QC. She alleged that through “charade and false pretenses of mutilation under Art 262 of RPC.
invariably committed by all of the respondents in conspiracy with each other, on 31
Jan 2002, my common law brother LA, although of legal age but conspiratorially Elements of Mutilation
caused to be declared by” PA, RO, Dr. RA and several John/Jane Does to be 1. That there be a castration, that is, mutilation of
“mentally deficient” and “incompetent to give consent to his BILATERAL organs necessary for generation, such as the penis or
VASECTOMY, was then intentionally, unlawfully, maliciously, feloniously and/or ovarium.
criminally placed thereafter under surgery for MUTILATION VIA “BILATERAL 2. That the mutilation is caused purposely and
VASECTOMY” EVEN WITHOUT ANY AUTHORIZATION ORDER from the deliberately, that is, to deprive the offended party of
GUARDIANSHIP COURT, nor personal consent” of LA himself. Under the some essential organ for reproduction.
circumstances,
a) it is proper to charge PA, RO, Dr. RA and several John/Jane Does with the (Ge-An, Reyes)
crime of “other deceit” under Art 318 of RPC, in relation to RA 7610,
considering the allegation of “charade and false pretenses”
b) It is not proper to charge Dr. RA , the urologist who performed the
procedure, much less the others, with the crime of mutilation under Art
262 of RPC
c) It is proper to charge only Dr. RA , the urologist who performed the
procedure, with the crime of mutilation under Art 262 of RPC
d) it is proper to charge PA, RO, Dr. RA and several John/Jane Does with the
crime of with the crime of mutilation under Art 262 of RPC
On 30 May 2000, at around 8pm, AAA was on her way home from a friend’s house. Rape only, the forcible abduction being absorbed in rape. Checked. -Tin
AT
(1) Approached AAA -Chrizelle, BB
(2) forced AAA to go with him

43
Thank you for your patience.
(3) told AAA that the supposed persons who wanted to kill her were at her
house
(4) dragged AAA towards the highway where a tricycle was waiting
(5) brought AAA to Tagkawayan, Quezon using the tricycle
(6) forced AAA to board the bus going to Sta. Elena, Quezon, using the
tricycle
(7) brought AAA to a hut in the middle of rice fields in Brgy. San Lorenzo.
AAA and AT spent the night in the hut. On 1 June 2000, AT (1) poked a
knife on AAA’s back (2) threatened to kill AAA (3) undressed AAA (4)
mounted AAA and (5) inserted his penis in AAA’s vagina. Under the
circumstance, AT should be convicted of the crime of (a) forcible
abduction with rape, the former having been employed as a necessary
means to commit the latter (b) serious illegal detention only, punishable
with the maximum penalty because the victim, a female who was
deprived of her liberty, was also raped (c) rape only, because there is no
evidence of the forcible abduction, but only of grave coercion which is
inherent in rape (d) rape only, the forcible abduction being absorbed in
rape.

Where X and Others grabbed a 16-year old girl, dragged her to a nearby forest and Forcible abduction with rape
there brutally ravished her, the crime is:
a. Rape only (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
b. Forcible adbcution with rape
c. Kidnapping with rape
d. Kidnapping only, rape being a mere incident thereof, possibly
aggravating the same

When rape is alleged and proven to have been committed with a deadly weapon It is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such
and by two persons, weapon) with the aggravating circumstance of superior strength
a. It is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such weapon) but (there being two rapists acting in concert)
it is not necessary to consider its commission by two persons as
aggravating since the rape was already qualified (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
b. It is considered qualified rape because it was committed by “two or
more persons” and the use of deadly weapon should be appreciated as
generic aggravating
c. It is considered to be qualified rape (due to the use of such deadly
weapon) with the aggravating circumstance of superior strength (there
being two rapists acting in concert)
d. It is simply considered qualified rape because it was committed by “two
or more persons”, the use of deadly weapon not being a generic
aggravating cirucmstance and no longer necessary to further qualify rape

As regards rape committed by means of force or intimidatio, it is necessary to show FALSE, On the degree of force as an element of rape, this Court
that such force or intimidation was irresistible finds it “not necessary to show that irresistible force or
intimidation accompanied the crime of rape; it suffices to show
that force or intimidation was present and did result in the
accused copulating with the offended woman against her will.”

44
Thank you for your patience.
Thus, the presence of abrasion on the victim’s lower back and at
the back of her chest, as well as contusions on her right forearm
and left knee, may suffice to show the use of force in committing
rape. Such injuries are compatible with the claim of the victim
that the rape was committed by force (People v. Cabierte, G.R.
No. 170477, Aug. 7, 2007)

Undated Samplex, 1-C

The absence of laceration in the genitalia of a supposed victim in a rape case should FALSE. Rupture or laceration of the hymen is not an element of
disprove rape, whether attempted or, much less, consummated. It is the laceration rape, which is consummated with the slightest penetration of the
of the hymen that is relevant in the crime of rape. labia of the pudendum. According to People v. Basas, “but it is
undeniable that their organs penetrated the vagina although the
penetration did not break the hymen, but only caused a
contusion. The rape was consummated. (People v. Royeras). The
rupturing of the hymen is not indispensable to a conviction of the
consummated crime of rape: entry of the labia of the female
organ without rupture or laceration is generally held to be
sufficient (People v. Hernandez). There must be proof of some
degree of entrance of the male organ within the labia of the
pudendum (People v. Rivera)

A medical examination of the victim is indispensable in a prosecution for rape FALSE. A medical examination and a medical certificate are
merely corroborative and are not indispensable to the
prosecution of a rape case. In the crime of rape, the testimony of
the victim and not the findings of the medico-legal officer is the
most important element to prove that the felony had been
committed. Even without a medical report, a medical
examination of the victim is not indispensable in a prosecution
for rape; the victim’s tesimony alone if credible is sufficient to
convict the accused of the crime.

In view of the difference between the two modes of committing rape, it cannot be TRUE, In view of the material difference between the two modes
contended that one necessarily covers, includes, or is covered or included in the of rape, the first mode is not necessarily included in the second,
later. and vice versa. Thus, where the charge in the information in a
criminal case is rape through carnal knowledge, the accused
cannot be found guilty of rape by sexual assault although it was
proven, without violating his constitutional right to be informed
of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. (People v.
Abulon, G.R. No. 174473, August 17, 2007)

Even if the information does not state that the victim became insane by reason or FALSE. The offender knew of mental disability, emotional
on the occasion of the rape, but merely alleges her to be an 18 year old mentally-ill disorder and/or physical handicap of offended party at the time
nieve of the accused, as long as the prosecution and the defence are one in saying of rape first incorporated by Art. 266-B, Rev. Pen. Code, as
that the victim was already mentally-ill or deemed at the time she was raped amended by Rep. Act. No. 8353; it needs to be distinguished
(December 29, 1996), the death penalty under Art. 266-B of RA 8353, otherwise from rape of the first kind, where the victim is demented or
known as “The Anti-Rape Law of 1997,” amending further Art. 335 of the Revised deprived of reason, which are integral elements of the crime so

45
Thank you for your patience.
Penal Code, as the uncle of the victim and as such, would have known of the mental committed; ARt. 266-A[1](b), “deprived of reason”, and [1](c),
disability, emotional disorder, or physical handicap of the victim at the time of the “demented”. Rev. Pen. Code, as amended by Rep. Act No. 8353
commission of the rape. Undated Samplex, 1-C

On 17 May 2000, at around 8am, AAA and AT went to Barangay Pinagdapian where False. AT is guilty beyong reasonable doubt only of two counts of
they were supposed to meet three women. When they arrived at the supposed rape. Focible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the
meeting place, the three women where not there. AAA and AT went to a hut owned real objective of the accused is to rape the victim. Based on the
by AT, then went to a place with banana trees. There, AT raped AAA. (1) he told her records, the objective of AT was to rape AAA when he brought
to undress; (2) threatened to kill her, her parents and her siblings; (3) he pushed her her to the place with banana trees and to Santa Elena, Camarines
to the ground ; (4) he told her that they will do three positions; (5) he kissed her Norte. (People V. Talan)
lips; (6) he sucked her breast; (7) he licked her vagina; (8) he inserted his penis in
her vagina; and (9) he told her not to tell anyone about what happened. After (Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
raping AAA for around 15 minutes, AT rested for around 5 minutes. AT then
rapedAAA again for around 10 minutes. Because of fear, AAA did not tell anyone
about the incident.

On 30 May 2000, at around 8pm, AAA was on her way home from a friend’s house.
AT (1)Approached AAA; (2)forced AAA to go with him; (3) told AAA that the
supposed persons who wanted to kill her were at her house; (4) dragged AAA
towards the highway where a tricycle was waiting; (5) brought AAA to Tagkawayan,
Quezon using the tricycle; (6) forced AAA to board the bus going to Santa Elena,
Camarines Norte, using the tricycle; (7) brought AAA to a hut in the middle of rice
fields in Brgy. San Lorenzo. AAA and AT spent the night in the hut.

On 1 June 2000, AT (1) poked a knife on AAA’s back (2) threatened to kill AAA (3)
undressed AAA (4) mounted AAA and (5) inserted his penis in AAA’s vagina.

Under the circumstance, AT should be convicted of the crime offorcible abduction
with rape, in connection with the acts means to committed AAA.


Title IX – Crimes Against Liberty
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
In view of the passage of RA 6235, the plain act of plane hijacking, not May still be punished as Grave Coercion, as in People v Ang Chong Kio,
attended by death, injury to persons, or damage to property... because prosecution for grave coercion would not bar prosecution for
a. may no longer be punished as grave coercion, as in People hijacking.
vs Ang Cho Kio, 95 Phil. 475, but simply as an act inimical to
civil aviation, in violation of Sec. 1 of said law (hijacking); -Chrizelle, BB.
b. may still be punished as grave coercion, as in People vs. Ang
Cho Kio, 95 Phil. 475, because prosecution for grave Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, serious physical
coercion would not bar prosecution for high-jacking injuries, or rape, it is a qualifying circumstance.
c. may be punished as grave coercion, as in People vs. Ang Cho
Kio, 95 Phil. 475, or as an act inimical to civil aviation, in Thus, such common crimes are only considered aggravating circumstances
violation of Sec. 1, of said law, depending solely on the only. They are not separate from or complexed with the crime of hijacking.
choice of the prosecution;
-Chrizelle, Reyes

46
Thank you for your patience.
d. may be punished as grave coercion or as an act inimical to
civil aviation, in violation of Sec. 1 of said law but, in any
event, the accused cannot be punished for both.
Assume that X is an amateur kidnapper who, armed with an unlicensed He can be separately charged with both crimes. The use of unlicensed
firearm and confederating with Z kidnapped Y with the end in view of firearm in the kidnapping is not inherent in the crime.
exacting ransom for his release. X was caught by police operatives,
while Z was able to escape, after a botched ransom payment. The Kidnap for Ransom
investigating prosecutor seeks to charge X on the one hand with - The essential element or act which makes the offense kidnapping
kidnapping for ransom and on the other hand with illegal possession of is the deprivation of an offended party’s liberty under any of the
firearms. Before doing so, he asks for your advice as his research four instances enumerated in Art. 267, par. 1 of the RPC.
assistant. What would you say? - But when the kidnapping or detention was committed for the
purpose of extorting ransom, it is not necessary that any or one of
the circumstances enumerated in par. 1 of Art. 267 be present.

Elements of Kidnapping for Ransom:
1. Intent on the part of the accused to deprive the victim of his
liberty
2. Actual deprivation of the victim of his liberty; and
3. Motive of the accused which is extorting ransom for the release of
the victim (People v. Ejandra, G.R No. 134203, May 27, 2004)

Possession of Illegal Firearms
- Any person who shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire,
dispose, or possess any firearm, part of firearm, ammunition or
machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be used in the
manufacture of any firearm or ammunition.
- If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed
firearm, such should be considered an aggravating circumstance
- If violation is in furtherance of or incident to, or in connection
with the crime of rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or attempted
coup d'etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the
crime of rebellion, or insurrection, sedition, or attempted coup
d'etat.
- If results in death of a person, use of explosives shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.


Distinguish serious illegal detention from arbitrary detention? Serious illegal detention has the following elements under Art. 267: Checked. -Chrizelle
1. that the offender is a private individual
2. that he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner Serious Illegal Detention is a crime against
deprives the latter of his liberty personal liberty Arbitrary Detention is a crime
3. that the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal against laws of the state Serious Illegal Detention
4. that in the commission of the offense, any of the following is crime may be committed by a private individual
circumstances is present: or public officer no legal duty to detain a person
a. that the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than and arrests a person for no legal ground.
three days
b. that it is committed stimulating public authority

47
Thank you for your patience.
c. that any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the Arbitrary Detention may only be committed by a
person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are public officer charged with the legal duty to detain
made; or a person but arrests a person for no legal ground.
d. that the person kidnapped or detained is a minor,
female, or a public officer

On the other hand, arbitrary detention takes place under Art. 124 when any
public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person.
(Ellaine, Reyes)
Distinguish trespass to dwelling from violation of domicile. Art. 280 states that in trespass to dwelling, a private person enters the -Checked. -Chrizelle
dwelling of another against the latter’s will.
While Art. 128 expresses that in violation of domicile, the offender is a public Violation of Domicile may only be committed by a
officer whose functions include effecting search and seizure, enters any public officer or employee Trespass to Dwelling
dwelling against the will of the owner and searches papers and effects may be committed by private individuals
without consent and refuses to leave the premises it has surreptitiously
entered and after having been required to leave the same. (Ellaine, Reyes) The purpose of Violation of Domicile is to search
papers or other effects without the consent of the
owner and without authorization by judicial order
to enter the dwelling and/or make the search
There is no such purpose in Trespass to Dwelling

How is grave threats committed? Grave threats are committed by any person who shall threaten another with
the infliction upon the person, honor, or property of the latter or of his
family of any wrong amounting to a crime, under Art. 282.

Those made with deliberate purpose of creating in the mind of the victim a
belief that the threat will be carried out are considered grave threats. they
are used to obtain a certain end or goal in the future. (Ellaine, Reyes)
Distinguish grave coercion from unjust vexation Elements of Grave Coercion
1. That a person prevented another from doing something not
prohibited by law, or that he compelled him to do something
against his will, be it right or wrong
2. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by violence,
threats or intimidation
3. That the person that restrained the will and liberty of another had
not the authority of law or the right to do so, or, in other words,
that the restraint shall not be made under authority of law or in
the exercise of any lawful right

Elements of Unjust Vexation
-- 1st and 3rd elements of Grave Coercion are present; but the 2nd element
(use of violence upon the offended party in preventing or compelling him to
do something against his will) is lacking

(Ge-An, Reyes)

48
Thank you for your patience.
When prosecuted for kidnapping for ransom, XA claimed that there XA should be held liable for kidnapping as, indeed, there was deprivation of Checked. - Ellaine
was no deprivation of liberty in this case because KN, a minor, liberty since the boy could not have gone home, brought as he was to an
voluntarily went with him to the mountainous area of Mayamot, a unfamiliar and deserted place at the mountain side.
deserted place admittedly unfamiliar to the boy, to get the promised
“Shaider” toy, and that during the period that KN was with him, the boy -Chrizelle, BB.
was always left alone at the hut where he could do anything he wished,
including escaping. Under the circumstances, Additional info:
a) XA should be held liable for kidnapping as, indeed, there was
deprivation of liberty since the boy could not have gone There argument does not persuade. There is deprivation of liberty even if the
home, brought as he was to an unfamiliar and deserted victim went voluntarily with the accused where the voluntary action was
place at the mountain side; induced by the accused false inducement without which the victim would
b) XA should not be held liable for kidnapping, not of any other not have gone with him. Here, KN, a 5 year old boy, was enticed by XA to go
crime, as, indeed, no deprivation of liberty is indicated by with him to the mountains side on the pretext that XA will give KN a toy, a
the facts since the boy was left alone in the place where he promise that was never fulfilled. And when KN signified his desire to go
was brought, without any restraint; home, XA told him to stay put because he had to wait for the ransom. In any
c) XA is liable for inducing a minor to abandon his dwelling, extent, even assuming arguendo that KN could do anything he wished to
instead of kidnapping, because the victim went voluntarily while at XA’s custody, it is not hard to imagine that the boy could not have
with the accused and the voluntary action was induced by gone home, brought as he was to an unfamiliar place at the mountain side.
the accused’s false inducement without which the victim Indeed, it could well be that XA left the boy alone without any restraint
would not have gone with him; precisely because he knew that it was impossible for 5 year old KN to escape
d) XA could not be held liable for kidnapping, there being no and go home. (People v. Jatulan, G.R. No 171653, Apr. 24, 2007)
indication in the foregoing facts that he ever sought ransom
for the return of the minor.
“A” is accused of robbery and is arrested by SPO2 B, a member of the Yes, SPO2 B should be held liable for arbitrary detention by imprudence.
Philippine National Police (PNP), by virtue of a warrant of arrest “A” put
a bail and was ordered released by the court. Three days late SPO2 B The facts of the case indicate that A kept telling SPO2 B that he was out on
saw “A” at a movie house and immediately arrested him and took him bail but SPO2B did not make an effort to verify the true facts. Instead, SPO2
to the nearest police precinct and was kept there till the next morning still detained him. Such was a form of imprudence and since SPO2B detained
when SPO2 B took him to the court. All along “A” was telling SPO2 B A with no legal ground, SPO2B is liable for arbitrary detention by
that was he out on bail, but SPO2 B would not believe him; neither did imprudence.
SPO2 B make effort to verify if “A” had really been released on bail.
Could SPO2 B be held liable for arbitrary detention? -Chrizelle, BB

a. Yes, because he committed arbitrary detention under
Article 124 by imprudence
b. No, because SPO2 B acted under a mistake of fact
c. Yes, but not under Article 124, RPC, which does not apply
where the arrest is made by virtue of a warrant of arrest
d. Yes, but only if he has exceeded the periods allowed under
Article 125, RPC, from the time of arrest to the time SPO2 B
took “A” to court.

Trespass to dwelling is qualified whenever committed By means of violence or intimidation. Checked. - Ellaine
a) With grave abuse of confidence
b) With obvious ungratefulness -Chrizelle, BB
c) By means of violence or intimidation
d) By entering the dwelling through a means not intended or
ingress or egress

49
Thank you for your patience.
The commission of a crime, which includes an attempt at the However, “legal ground” for detention contemplates not only instances
commission thereof, constitutes a legal ground for the detention of when warrantless arrests may be made.
persons-
a) therefore, “legal ground” for detention is exactly equivalent -Chrizelle, BB
to the instances when warrantless arrests may be made
b) however, “legal ground” for detention contemplates not Legal grounds for detention of persons include:
only instances when warrantless arrests may be made 1. Commission of a crime
c) consequently, where there is no crime committed, there can 2. violent insanity
be no “legal ground” for detention Any other ailment requiring compulsory confinement of the patient in a
d) therefore, the term “legal ground” for detention simply hospital - RPC Art 124(2)
translates to probable cause.
The list is not exclusive as long as the ground is considered legal.

-Chrizelle, Reyes
A public officer does not incur criminal liability for revealing secrets of The secrets are contrary to public interest or the administration of justice. Checked. - Ellaine
private individuals coming to his knowledge by reason of his office
when -Chrizelle, BB
a) the secrets are contrary to public interest or the
administration of justice Additional notes:
b) The secrets merely affect the name, honor or reputation of Art. 230 provides that for a public officer to be liable for revealing secrets of
such private individuals private individuals coming to his knowledge by reason of his office, the
c) Secrets affect merely the fortunes of such private individuals following requisites must concur:
d) No damage is caused by revealing such secrets to such 1.The offender is a public officer
private individuals 2. He knows of the secrets of a private individual by reason of his office
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable reason

A public officer may not incur criminal liability for revealing secrets of private
individuals if such revelation is with authority or justifiable reason. He is also
not liable if the secrets are contrary to public interest or the administration
of justice.
Moreover, if the offender is an attorney-at-law or a solicitor and he reveals
the secrets of his client learned by him in his professional capacity, he is not
liable under Art. 230, but under 209.
Reyes p. 486-487

*BOLD TEXT FROM Multiple Choice - Finals Samplex 1-E (2015)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
A harbor policeman and a policemen of the Manila Police Department Yes, but only for serious physical injuries, not direct assault, because the act Checked -Nico
happened to investigate a complaint for theft committed in the pier. was not motivated by an intention to defy the authority of the harbor
The harbor policemen claimed that the MPD policemen had no right or policeman.
authority to investigate any case within the harbor compound. The
MPD Policeman seriously injured the harbor policeman. Is the MPD -Chrizelle, BB
policeman guilty of any crime?
a. No, because both the MPD Policeman and the harbor Under Art 148, RPC:
policeman were contending in the exercise of authority Even another person in authority can be guilty of assault upon a person or
b. Yes, for direct assault, because the harbor policeman is an his agent.
agent of a person in authority obviously in the performance
of duty when he was injured

50
Thank you for your patience.
c. Yes, but only for serious physical injuries, not direct assault, However, there can be no assault upon or disobedience to one’s authority by
because the act was not motivated by an intention to defy another person in authority or his agent when they both contend that they
the authority of the harbor policeman were in the exercise of their respective duties.
d. Yes,, for the complex crime of direct assault with serious
physical injuries, because the quarrel and the fight would If the accused was also acting in the performance of his official duties, the
not have ensued had not the MPD policeman actually defied crime committed may be coercion or physical injuries.
the authority of the harbor policeman.
-Chrizelle, Reyes.
Is it always necessary in the crime of direct assault that the person in No Checked. -Chrizelle
authority or his agent be in the actual performance of his official duty
when he is attacked or seriously intimidated by the offender? (Pre-Final/Make up Examination 1-F, May 27, 2019 Under RPC Art. 148: The victim in Direct Assault is
a Person in Authority (PA) or his Agent (APA) and
the attack, employment of force or intimidation is
committed on the occasion of the performance of
his official duties or by reason of such
performanceThe victim may be assaulted by
reason of the past performance of his official
duties
The municipal treasurer of a town, having found his servant quarreling Unlawful arrest Oh no contradicting ulit :o
with his wife, seized and detained him in the municipal jail. What crime (JUNE 2018 FINALS)
was committed by the municipal treasurer? -Nico
a. Arbitrary detention
b. Illegal detention
c. Unlawful arrest
d. Warrantless arrest

X, a policeman, arrested a person without legal ground and detained Yes, because the place of detention is immaterial. Checked. - Erin
him in his house for revenge, not in the jail, releasing him after eight
hours. Would X be liable for arbitrary detention? -Chrizelle, BB
a. Yes, because the place of detention is immaterial
b. Yes, but by failing to deliver the detained person to the Art 124 of RPC: Detention is actual confinement of a person in an enclosure,
proper judicial authorities or in any manner detaining or depriving him of his liberty. The place of
c. No, but for illegal detention because the personal motive detention is immaterial.
transcends his public position
d. No, considering that the person arrested was released after -Chrizelle, Reyes
eight hours.
A policeman, suspecting that X stole the missing jeep of M, called X to No, there was neither confinement nor restraint on the person of X
the police precinct at about 8 o’clock in the evening, and investigated
the latter there and then. X was told to stay in the precinct until the (Pre-Finals/Make Up Examination 2019, 1-F 2019)
investigation was terminated, but allowing him to go to the nearby
store when he wanted to drink and to eat and permitting him to go
around the premises of the police precinct. He did not go home until
the next morning, to his disgust and annoyance. Was the policeman
guilty of arbitrary detention?
a. Yes, because there was no legal ground to hold X in the
precinct throughout the time it took him to investigate
b. No, there was neither confinement nor restraint on the
person of X

51
Thank you for your patience.
c. Yes, because X was not free to leave as he pleased, although
not incarcerated
d. Yes, because being permitted to go around the premises of
the police precinct was sufficient to constitute restraint
upon person of X.
May the chief of police order the arrest of the offender, who is No, the chief of police can only file a complaint with the proper authority to Checked. - Erin
preparing to leave the country allegedly for medical treatment, after institute criminal proceedings against the offender.
hearing the complainant and his witnesses and becoming satisfied that
the person complained against committed murder? -Chrizelle, BB
a. Yes, being satisfied that the person complained of has
committed murder, there is legal ground to arrest and
detain the offender
b. Yes, but only if the offender is about to leave the country
c. No, the chief of police cannot issue an arrest order, not even
a hold departure order, but may apply for to put the
offender on a watch list
d. No, the chief of police can only file a complaint with the
proper authority to institute criminal proceedings against
the offender
What is the liability of a private individual who induced a policeman to Arbitrary detention, as principal by inducement. Checked. - Erin
detain a person without legal ground if the policeman actually so
detained that person? -Chrizelle, BB
a. illegal detention, because a private individual cannot be held
liable for arbitration detention Art 124, RPC: If the offender is a private individual, the act of detaining
b. Arbitrary detention, as principal by inducement another is Illegal Detention. However, private individuals who conspire with
c. Unlawful arrest, as co-conspirator public officers can be liable as principals in the crime of Arbitrary Detention.
d. Unlawful arrest, as principal by inducement
-Chrizelle, Reyes
A inflicted on B serious physical injuries resulting in the latter’s total Thirty-six hours. Checked. - Erin
blindness, punishable by prision mayor. The policeman who saw the
commission of the crime arrested and detained A. For how long a time -Chrizelle, BB
can the policeman legally detain A without delivering him to the proper
judicial authority? Art 125, RPC:
a. twelve hours Delivery of detained person must be done within:
b. twenty-four hours (1) 12 hours for offenses punishable by light penalties or their
c. thirty-six hours equivalent.
d. forty-eight hours (2) 18 hours for offenses punishable by correctional penalties or their
equivalent
(3) 36 hours for offenses punishable by afflictive penalties or their
equivalent.

Prision Mayor being an afflictive penalty, the detained person must be
delivered within 36 hours.

-Chrizelle, Reyes

52
Thank you for your patience.
A policeman, becoming angry with the owner of a house, forcibly No, because his purpose in entering the dwelling was not to violate the Checked. - Erin
entered the same against the owner’s will and attacked such owner domicile.
inside his house. Is the policeman liable for the crime of violation of
domicile? -Chrizelle, BB

a) No, because his purpose in entering the dwelling was not to Under Art 128, RPC:
violate the domicile; In order to be criminally liable,
b) No, because it does not appear that he had been first asked (1) Offender must be a public officer or employee
to leave and, having been asked to leave, had refused to do (2) not authorized by judicial order to enter dwelling and/or to make
so; a search for papers or effects.
c) No, because his private motive transcends his public The purpose of the police officer was not to search papers or other effect,
character and, therefore, the crime committed is trespass to but the forcible entrance was due to the anger against the owner.
dwelling;
d) Yes, because he entered the dwelling without a search If the offender is a public officer whose function does not include the duty to
warrant. effect search and seizure, the crime committed is trespass to dwelling.
For an attorney’s act of revealing secrets of a client learned in It is enough that such secrets have been revealed. Checked. - Ellaine
professional capacity to constitute betrayal of trust,
-Chrizelle, BB.
a) the attorney must, at least have, intent to cause damage or
prejudice to the client;
b) it is enough that such secrets have been revealed;
c) it is necessary that the revelation of such secrets should
cause damage or prejudice to the client;
d) the attorney must intend to betray the client’s trust, hence
mere revelation of such secrets is not enough.
What crime is committed by a private individual who prevented or Grave coercion under RPC Art 286. Checked. - Erin
disturbed a religious ceremony or manifestation of any religion, using
violence or intimidation? -Chrizelle, BB

Grave coercion under Art 286, RPC is the act of preventing another by means
of violence, threats or intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by
law. The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed if coercion is committed
to prevent another from performing any religious act.

-Chrizelle, Reyes
State the burden of the prosecution in cases involving Kidnapping or The prosecution should prove that there was an actual deprivation of liberty.
Serious Illegal Detention.
The essential element of kidnapping is the deprivation of an offended party’s
liberty. (People v. Suarez)

It is essential in the crime of illegal detention that there be actual
confinement or restriction of the person of the offended party. (US v.
Cabanag)

(Resen, Reyes)

53
Thank you for your patience.
When does extortion of a confession or obtaining information by Extortion of a confession or obtaining information by means of violence
means of violence constitute the crime of Maltreatment of Prisoner, constitute the crime of Maltreatment of Prisoner if the offended party is a
and when does the same act constitute Grave Coercion? prisoner. It is Grave Coercion when the offended party is not a prisoner.

-Chrizelle, Beda Mem Aid
In kidnapping, what is the effect of the victim’s minority and demand If the victim is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial. If the
for ransom on the legal classification of the victim’s deprivation of victim is kidnapped and illegally detained for the purpose of extorting
liberty? ransom, the duration of his detention becomes inconsequential. The crime
becomes qualified and becomes punishable even if none of the
circumstances mentioned in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 267 of the Revised
Penal Code is present.
(People v. Raga Sarapida Mamantak, G.R. 174659)

Art. 267(4) Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention (as amended by R.A.
7659)

4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except when the
accused is any of the parents, female, or a public officer
The penalty shall be death penalty where the kidnapping or detention was
committed for extorting ransom from the victim or any other person, even if
none of the circumstances above-mentioned were present in the
commission of the offense.

(MM, Jurisprudence and R.A. 7659)
The common element in various forms of grave coercion is: (a) demand Use of violence or such display of force as controls the will of the victim.
for money or imposition of condition; (b) preventing another from
doing something not prohibited by law; (c) compelling another to do -Chrizelle, BB
something against his will; (d) use of violence or such display of force as
controls the will of the victim.
In which case, among the following, would the act of preventing Preventing another from performing a religious act. Checked. - Ellaine
another from doing something, by means of violence or intimidation,
constitute only grave coercion instead of another crime: -Chrizelle, BB
(a) hindering or preventing another from joining any lawful
association or from attending any of its meeting committed
by a public officer
(b) preventing another from performing a religious act
(c) preventing the meeting of a legislative body
(d) preventing a member of Congress from attending the
meetings thereof, or from expressing his opinion or from
casting his vote.
How is serious illegal detention committed, and when is illegal Pursuant to Article 267 and 268 of the RPC, the difference between serious
detention merely considered “slight”? illegal detention and slight illegal detention is that in the latter, the crime is
committed without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated
in Article 267. These are either:
1. Kidnapping/detention lasts for more than 3 days;
2. Crime is committed simulating public authority;
3. Any serious physical injuries inflicted upon the person kidnapped
or detained, or threats to kill him was made;

54
Thank you for your patience.
4. person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except when the
accused is any of the parents, female or a public officer
serious illegal detention is committed when the above mentioned
circumstances are present in the commission of the crime and said crime is
perpetuated by a private individual who illegally kidnaps/detains another, or
in any manner that deprives the latter of his liberty.
Distinguish white slavery from white slavery trade. "Slavery, under Article 272,
1)The offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a human being; and
2) That the purpose of the offender is to enslave such human being

While white slave trade Under Article 341 of the RPC, is:
1) engaging in the business of prostitution;
2) profiting by prostitution
3) Enlisting the services of women for the purpose of protitution one of
those mentioned above is enough to constitute the offense

The main difference is that Under 272, the victim is any human being and the
purpose is to enslave while under 341, victims are limited only to females
and the purpose is for prostitution "
Reyes Book (p. 595 and 931)
Beda Mem Aid 2018 p. 268
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
On the occasion or in the course of the commission of the crime of Aggravating Circumstances.
hijacking of an airplane, while the same was in flight from Davao City to
Manila, three persons were killed. What crimes were committed and RA 6235 or Anti-Hijacking Law Whenever the crime of hijacking is
how should the offenders be prosecuted? accompanied by murder, homcide, serious physical injuries or rape, such are
considered qualifying circumstances. Thus, such common crimes are
considered aggravating circumstances only; they are not separated from nor
complexed with the crime of hijacking.

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)
In his Affidavit-Complaint for Arbitrary Detention against YY and Others
(not including Police Chief RC), identified that it was Police Chief RC
who caused his detention. Nowhere in said affidavit did XX allege that
YY and Others effected his detention, or were in any other way
involved in it. Will the criminal charge for Arbitrary Detention prosper?

Title X – Crimes Against Property
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
A police officer who, without a search warrant, shall surreptitiously Incurs no criminal liability for violation of domicile under Article 128 of the RPC.
enter a dwelling for the purpose of search but after being required
to leave the premises by the owner thereof, shall promptly do, - BB
incurs no criminal liability for violation of domicile under Article 128
of the RPC. To incur criminal liability under Art 128, RPC: Even if the entrance is only
without consent, the crime is committed when there is refusal to leave the
a) incurs no criminal liability for violation of domicile under premises when required to do so.
Article 128 of the Revised Penal Code;
b) commits trespass to dwelling -Chrizelle, Reyes

55
Thank you for your patience.
c) is, nevertheless, liable for the crime of violation of
domicile, which was already consummated at the time
of his discovery incident the dwelling;
d) is liable only for unjust vexation

Define the crime of theft Theft is defined by Art. 308 as committed by any person who, with intent to gain
but without violence against, or intimidation of persons nor force upon things,
shall take personal property of another without the latter’s consent. Elements of
which are:
1. that there be taking of personal property
2. that said property belongs to another
3. that the taking be done with intent to gain
4. that the taking be done without consent of the owner
5. that the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against
or intimidation of persons or force upon things. (Ellaine, Reyes)
May theft be committed in the frustrated stage; why? The Supreme Court has held in Valenzuela v. People that there is no crime of
frustrated theft. The ability of the offender to freely dispose of property stolen
is not a constitutive element of the crime of theft. There is no language in Art.
308 that expressly or impliedly allows that the “free disposition of the items
stolen” is in any way determinative of whether the crime of theft has been
produced. Under the RPC, there is no frustrated theft because there is only
consummated theft the moment there is asportacion or unlawful taking or
possession of personal property - no matter how momentary it may be. (Ellaine,
Valenzuela v. People)
May the “use of unlicensed firearm” be appreciated as a special NO. The use of unlicensed firearm cannot be appreciated as a special
aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery with homicide aggravating circumstances in the crime of robbery with homicide when it is
when it is committed by a band; why committed by a band. This is because Art. 295 does not apply to subdivisions 1
and 2 of Art. 294 of the Revised Penal Code despite the fact that the act is
committed by a band.

(Ge-An, BB)
Distinguish brigandage under Art. 306 RPC from highway As to conspiracy among the members, P.D. No 532 the mere conspiracy to
robbery/brigandage under PD 532 constitute the offense of brigandage is not punishable as it presupposes that
acts defined are actually committed while in Art. 306 of the RPC, the mere
formation of a band for any purpose indicated in the law is punishable. As to
formation of a band, PD No. 532 states that offenders need not constitute a
band since one person can commit the crime wherein Art. 306 of the RPC
requires the band of robbers (more than three malefactors.) As to the victim, PD
No. 532 states that anybody could be the victim while Art. 306 of the RPC states
that there is preconceived victim. As to the commission of robbery, PD No. 532
requires that it must not be an isolated case of robbery while in Art. 306 of the
RPV, the fact that the robbery was committed for the first time is immaterial.
Accomplices under PD No. 532 are those who abet brigandage (Sec. 4) while Art.
306 shows that accomplices are those who profit from the loot (Art. 307.)
(Ellaine, Reyes)

56
Thank you for your patience.
On May 19, 1994, at around 4:30 p.m., VA and CN were sighted VA and CN should be punished for consummated theft because the taking of the Checked. - Ellaine
outside the Super Sale Club, a supermarket within the ShoeMart stolen goods was completed once the same were physically possessed by the
(SM) complex along North EDSA, by LO, a security guard who was culprits and loaded by them in the pushcart.
then manning his post at the open parking area of the supermarket.
LO saw VA, who was wearing an identification card with the mark -Chrizelle, BB.
“Receiving Dispatching Unit (RDU),” hauling a push cart with cases
of well-known “Tide” brand. VA unloaded these cases in an open Additional info:
parking space, where CN was waiting. VA then returned inside the Consummated theft. Under Art. 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft cannot
supermarket, and after five (5) minutes, emerged with more have a frustrated stage. Theft can only be attempted or consummated. The
cartons of Tide Ultramatic and again unloaded these boxes to the moment VA obtained physical possession of the cases of detergent and loaded
same area in the open parking space. Thereafter, VA left the them in the pushcart, such seizure upon things, and accomplished without the
parking area and hailed a taxi. He boarded the cab and directed it consent of SM Super Sales Club, VA forfeited the extenuating benefit a
towards the parking space where CN was waiting. CN loaded the conviction for only attempted theft would have afforded him. Therefore, having
cartons of Tide Ultramatic inside the taxi, then boarded the vehicle. gone beyond the attempted stage, the theft in question should be punished as
All these acts were eyed by LO, who proceeded to stop the taxi as it consummated theft (Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
was leaving the open parking area. When LO asked VA for a receipt
of the merchandise, VA and CN reacted by fleeting on foot, but LO
fired a warning shot to alert his fellow security guards of the
incident. VA and CD were apprehended at the scene, and the stolen
merchandise recovered. Under the circumstances,

a) VA and CN should be punished for frustrated theft, since
they were caught before they could dispose of the stolen
goods;
b) VA and CN should be punished for attempted theft, since
VA and CN never completed the acts of taking because
they were apprehended before they could pass through
the security guard;
c) VA and CN should be punished for consummated theft
because the taking of the stolen goods was completed
once the same were physically possessed by the culprits
and loaded by them in the pushcart;
d) Qualified theft in its consummated stage since one of
the malefactors wore an identification card with the
mark “Receiving Dispatching Unit (RDU)”.
Whenever a public officer commits any of the crimes of swindling He will be prosecuted under the appropriate provisions on swindling and other Checked. - Ellaine
and other deceits, defined and penalized under Chapter 6, Title Ten deceits, defined and penalized under Chapter 6, Title Ten of the Rev. Pen. Code,
of the Rev. Pen. Code, taking advantage of his official position, then subject to the provisions of Article 214, Title Seven of the same Code.
a) he may only be prosecuted therefor under the relevant
provisions of Title Seven of the same Code, on crimes -Chrizelle, BB
committed by public officers, particularly Article 214
thereof;
b) he will be prosecuted under the appropriate provisions
on swindling and other deceits, defined and penalized
under Chapter 6, Title Ten of the Rev. Pen. Code, subject
to the provisions of Article 214, Title Seven of the same
Code;

57
Thank you for your patience.
c) he will be prosecuted under the appropriate provisions
on swindling and other deceits, defined and penalized
under Chapter 6, Title Ten of the Rev. Pen. Code, with
the special aggravating circumstance of abuse of official
position;
d) he will be prosecuted under the appropriate provisions
of Article 214, Title Seven of the same Code or under the
appropriate provisions on swindling and other deceits,
defined and penalized under Chapter 6, Title Ten of the
Rev. Pen. Code, depending upon the choice of the
prosecution.
An act of robbery or forcible depredation committed in a vessel Checked. -Chrizelle
while on high seas is – Piracy but only if not committed by members of the complement or crew or
passengers of the vessel; otherwise, robbery.
a) always piracy.
-Chrizelle, BB
b) piracy but only if not committed by members
of the complement or crew or passengers of the vessel;
otherwise, robbery.

c) always robbery, no doubt, that is, no “ifs” and

“buts”;

d) piracy but only if committed by members of

the complement or crew or passengers of the vessel;
otherwise, robbery.

In a meeting held on Oct 30 1996, AF admitted having received an AF is guilty of qualified theft under Art 308/309/310, RPC. Checked - Ellaine
amount of money collected from a client of Porta-Phone, where AF
works as marketing manager. The amount was a refundable deposit -Chrizelle, BB
for the communication items leased out by Porta-Phone to
Hemisphere AF admitted having kept it until his reimbursements Additional info:
from the company would be released to him. Porta-Phone The collected amount belonged to Porta-Phone and not to AF. When he
consistently sought the return of the amount from AF in the received the same, he was obliged to turn it over to the company since he had
meetings held for this purpose and in the various letters issued by no right to retain it or to use it for his own benefit, because the amount was a
the company, but AF refused to do so. Under the circumstances, refundable deposit for the communication items leased out by Porta-Phone to
a) AF is guilty of estafa with abuse of confidence under Art Hemisphere. As he had kept it for himself while knowing that the amount is not
315(1)(b), RPC hims, the presence of the element of unlawful taking is settled. In this case, it
b) AF is guilty of qualified theft under Art 308/309/310, RPC was apparent that the reason why AF took the money was that he intended to
c) AF is liable for other forms of swindling under Art 316, gain by it. AF’s lack of authority to receive the amount is apparent, because he is
RPC not one of the collection officers authorized to collect and receive payment. The
d) AF is guilty of light coercion under Art 287, RPC lack of consent by the owner of the asported money is manifested by the fact
that Porta-Phone consistently sought the return of the same from AF. Finally, as
a marketing manager of Porta-Phone, AF made use of his position to obtain the
refundable deposit due to Porta-Phone and appropriate it for himself. He could
not have taken the amount had he not been an officer of the said company.

58
Thank you for your patience.
Clearly, the taking was done with grave abuse of confidence (Cruz v. People,
G.R. No. 176504, Sept. 3, 2008)

In the context of the elements of estafa with abuse of confidence A formal or written demand is not necessary at all, whether or not there is
under Art 315(1)(b), RPC evidence of misappropriation or conversion, and its absence is not fatal to the
a) A formal and written demand is necessary, such that the cause of the prosecution.
failure of the prosecution to present proof of a written
demand would be fatal to its cause -Chrizelle, BB
b) A formal or written demand is necessary only if there is
NO evidence of misappropriation or conversion, such REASON: Demand under this kind of estafa need not be formal or written. The
that the failure of the prosecution to present proof of a law is silent with regard to the form of demand in estafa under Art. 315(1)(b),
written demand in such case would be fatal to its cause RPC. When the law does not qualify, we should not qualify. Should a written
c) A formal or written demand is necessary only if there is demand be necessary, the law would have stated so. Otherwise, the word
evidence of misappropriation or conversion, such that “demand” should be interpreted in its general meaning as to include both
the failure of the prosecution to present proof of a written and oral demand. Thus, the failure of the prosecution to present a
written demand in such case would be fatal to its cause written demand as evidence is not fatal. In Tubb v. People, where the
d) A formal or written demand is not necessary at all, complainant was merely verbally inquired about the money entrusted to the
whether or not there is evidence of misappropriation or accused, the SC held that the query was tantamount to a demand. The law does
conversion, and its absence is not fatal to the cause of not require a demand as condition precedent to the existence of the crime of
the prosecution embezzlement. It so happens only that failure to account upon demand for
funds or property held in trust is circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.
The same may, however, be established by other proof. In a case where the
complainant stated that she went to the house of the accused in Pangasinan to
demand the return of the money, while accused stated that the complainant
demanded the return of the “down payment” because allegedly, the sale did
not materialize, the SC concluded that, in both versions, the fact remains that
demand was made upon the accused (Asejo v. People). No specific type of proof
is required to show that there was demand. Demand need not even be formal: it
may be verbal. The specific word “demand” need not even be used to show that
it has indeed been made upon the person charged since even a mere query as
to the whereabouts of the money would be tantamount to a demand (Tan a.k.a.
Ching v. People)

(MM, T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
X was elected vice-president of the Assumption College Parents True.
Council for the school year 1996-1997. When the council’s
president suffered a stroke, X took over as acting president from REASON: All the elements concur in this case. First, X received the money in
October 1996-June 1997. The council’s funds, at that time trust or for administration as the council’s acting president; second, she failed to
deposited in the United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB) and substantiate her claim that she did not misappropriate the money; third, the
Asianbank, were entrusted to her. In 1998, when Y became council was prejudiced by such misappropriation and fourth, she failed to return
president, X was requested to turn over the council’s money to the the money to the council despite repeated demands to do so (Pascual v.
new set of officers but despite several demands, X failed to do so. People).
Later, Y discovered that X had already withdrawn the money from
UCPB and Asianbank. Although X opened a new account in the (MM, T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
council’s name at Philippine National Bank, she, however, failed to
deposit about P578, 208.96 of the council’s money. Under the

59
Thank you for your patience.
circumstances, X committed estafa under Art. 315(1)(b) of the
RPC.

A, who while visiting the house of his married sister, B, saw the Liable for theft.
latter’s purse and took it, extracting therefrom a P50 bill with which
he bought himself some snacks, is -Chrizelle, BB
a) Not criminally but only civilly liable
b) Liable for estafa or swindling
c) Liable for theft
d) Exempt from criminal and civil liability
What element of theft is lacking when a person takes property Intent to gain.
belonging to another, believing in good faith that it belongs to him
and returns the same one day after realizing that it was not so -Chrizelle, BB
a) Violence against or intimidation of persons
b) Use of force upon things
c) Intent to withhold the thing at the time of taking with
the character of permanency
d) Intent of gain
X, who picked the pocket of Y, succeeding to extract Y’s wallet Guilty of theft.
therefrom, but threw it away, seconds afterwards, after finding it
empty, allowing Y, who was running after X, to retrieve it, is: -Chrizelle, BB.
a) Guilty of unjust vexation
b) Guilty of an impossible crime
c) Guilty of theft
d) Not guilty of any crime at all
PA was found guilty of destruction arson, then a capital offense, His conviction for Destructive Arson cannot be sustained because he is guilty of
under Art 320 RPC, as amended by RA 7659. The properties burned Simple Arson penalized under Sec, 3, par. 2, PD 1613.
by PA are specifically described as houses. The descriptions as
alleged in the 2nd Amended Information filed against PA -Chrizelle, BB.
particularly refer to the structures as houses. It appears that he was
acting more on impulse, heat of anger or risen temper rather than REASON: The applicable provision of law should be Sec. 3, par. 2 of PD 1613,
real spite or hatred what impelled him to give vent to his wounded which imposes a penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua for other
ego. Under those circumstances, (a) his conviction for Destructive cases of arson as the properties burned by accused-appellant are specifically
Arson cannot be sustained because he is guilty of Simple Arson described as houses, contemplating inhabited houses or dwelling under the
under Sec. 1, PD 1613; (b) his conviction for Destructive Arson aforesaid law. The descriptions as alleged in the second Amended Information
should be sustained, as indeed, he is guilty thereof under Art. 320 particularly refer to the structures as houses rather than as building or edifices.
of RPC; (c) his conviction for Destructive Arson cannot be The applicable law should therefore be Sec. 3 par. 2 of PD 1613 and not Art. 320
sustained as, indeed, he is guilty of Destructive Arson but under par. 1 of the Penal Code. In case of ambiguity in construction of penal law, it is
Sec. 2, PD 1613, not under Art. 320, RPC; (d) his conviction for well-settled that such laws shall be construed strictly against the government,
Destructive Arson cannot be sustained because he is guilty of and liberally in favor of the accused. In the present case, the act committed by
Simple Arson penalized under Sec, 3, par. 2, PD 1613. PA neither appears to be heinous nor represents a greater degree of perversity
and viciousness as distinguished from those acts punishable under Art. 320 of
the RPC. No qualifying circumstance was established to convert the offense to
Destructive Arson. The special aggravating circumstance that PA was “motivated
by spite or hatred towards the owner or occupant of the property burned”
cannot be appreciated in the present case where it appears that he was acting
more on impulse, heat of anger, or risen tempter rather than real spite or

60
Thank you for your patience.
hatred that impelled him to give vent to his wounded ego. Nothing can be worse
than a spurned lover or disconsolate father under the prevailing circumstances
that surrounded the burning of the house. Thus, PA must be held guilty of
Simple Arson penalized under Sec. 3, par. 2 of PD 1613 for the act of
intentionally burning an inhabited house or dwelling (Buebos and Buebos v.
People).

(Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

As stated in the accusatory portion of the Information, AP was False.
charged with the crime of Simple Arson - for having “deliberately
set fire upon the two-storey residential house of ROBERTO SEPARA REASON: In a similar case decided by the SC, the accused caused the burning of
and family xxx knowing the same to be an inhabited house and a particular house. Unfortunately, the blaze spread and gutted down five (5)
situated in a thickly populated place and as a consequence thereof neighboring houses. The RTC therein found the accused guilty of destructive
a conflagration ensued and the said building, together with some arson under par. 1 of Art. 320 of the RPC, as amended by RA 7659. This SC,
seven (7) adjoining houses, were razed by fire.” Under the however, declared therein that the applicable provision of law should be Sec. 3,
circumstances, AP should be held liable for Destructive Arson, par. 2, of PD 1613, which imposes a penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion
instead of Simple Arson. perpetua for other cases of arson as the properties burned by accused are
specifically described as houses, contemplating inhabited houses or dwellings
under the aforesaid law. The descriptions as alleged in the second Amended
Information particularly refer to the structures as houses rather than as
buildings or edifices. The applicable law should therefore be Sec. 3, par. 2 of PD
1613 and not Art. 320, par. 1 of the Penal Code. In case of ambiguity in
construction of penal laws, it is well settled that such laws shall be construed
strictly against the government, and liberally in favor of the accused. The
elements of arson under Sec. 3 par. 2 of PD 1613 are:
(a) there is intentional burning; and
(b) what is intentionally burned is an inhabited house or dwelling.
Those elements were found to have concurred in said case. In the present case,
AP was charged with having intentionally burned the two-storey residential
house of Robert Separa. Said conflagration likewise spread and destroyed seven
(7) adjoining houses. Consequently, if proved, as it was proved at the trial, she
may be convicted and sentenced of the offense in the information. The
information remains effective insofar as it states the facts constituting the crime
alleged therein. What is controlling is not the title of the complaint, nor the
designation of the offense charged or the particular law or part thereof allegedly
violated, but the description of the crime charged and the particular facts
therein recited (Buebos and Buebos v. People).

(Undated Samplex, Sec. 1-C)
Where there is no proof that the accused organized themselves to The accused cannot be convicted of highway robbery with homicide under Pres.
commit highway robbery, the prosecution having succeeded only in Dec. No. 532, but only of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide
establishing a single act of robbery on a particular person who, by under Art. 294 of the Rev. Pen. Code.
the way, was also killed by reason or on the occasion thereof,
-Chrizelle, BB
a) the accused cannot be convicted of highway robbery
with homicide under Pres. Dec. No. 532, but only of the Consistent with the above, to obtain a conviction for highway robbery the
prosecution should have proven that the accused in the instant case were

61
Thank you for your patience.
special complex crime of robbery with homicide under organized for the purpose of committing robbery indiscriminately. There,
Art. 294 of the Rev. Pen. Code; however, was a total absence of such proof. There was no previous attempt at
b) the accused cannot be convicted of the special complex similar robberies the accused to show “indiscriminate” commission thereof.
crime of robbery with homicide under Art. 294 of the (People v. Mendoza)
Rev. Pen. Code, but only of highway robbery with
homicide under Pres. Dec. No. 532; We declare at the outset that even granting ex gratia that the established facts
c) the accused may still be convicted of highway robbery prove beyond reasonable doubt that Laurente and his two co-accused indeed
with homicide under Pres. Dec. No. 532 as long as both committed the acts charged in the information, 4 Laurente cannot be validly
the robbery and the homicide are committed on a convicted for highway robbery with homicide under P.D. No. 532. The object of
Philippine highway; the decree is to deter and punish lawless elements who commit acts of
d) the accused can still be convicted of the special complex depredation upon persons and properties of innocent and defenseless
crime of robbery with homicide under Art. 294 of the inhabitants who travel from one place to another — which acts constitute either
Rev. Pen. Code, in addition to highway robbery with piracy or highway robbery/brigandage — thereby disturbing the peace, order,
homicide under Pres. Dec. No. 532. and tranquility of the nation and stunting the economic and social progress of
the people. 5 It is directed against acts of robbery perpetrated by outlaws
indiscriminately against any person on Philippine highways, as defined therein,
and not those committed against a predetermined or particular victim.
Accordingly, a robbery committed on a Philippine highway by persons who are
not members of the prescribed lawless elements or directed only against a
specific, intended, or preconceived victim, is not a violation of P.D. No. 53
(People v. Laurente)

(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)



A domestic servant who, taking advantage of the absence of the Robbery with force upon things.
owner thereof, broke open a locked chest and took money and
jewelry therefrom and thereafter, spent the proceeds for her own -Chrizelle, BB
benefit, committed the crime of (a) simple theft (b) robbery with
force upon things (c) qualified theft (d) estafa with abuse of
confidence
Where X entered the house of Y, a woman, took her money and Robbery with homicide, aggravated by rape.
jewelry, raped her and, then, killed her, the crime committed is: (a)
robbery with homicide, aggravated by rape (b) robbery with rape (c) -Chrizelle, BB
robbery with rape, aggravated by homicide (d) robbery with
homicide only.
May the “use of unlicensed firearm” be appreciated as a special The special aggravating circumstance of use of unlicensed firearm is not
aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery with homicide applicable to robbery with homicide committed by a band.
when it is committed by a band? Why?
No, the “use of unlicensed firearm” cannot be appreciated as a special
aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery with homicide when it is
committed by a band. This is because Art. 295 does not apply to subdivisions 1
and 2 of Art. 294 of the RPC despite the fact that the act is committed by a
band.

62
Thank you for your patience.
-Tin (2015 Bernardo Samplex)

The circumstance that the robbery was committed by a band would only be
appreciated as an ordinary aggravating circumstance in robbery with homicide.
With the present wording of Art. 295, there is no such crime as robbery with
homicide in band. (Id.)

-Tin, Beda Mem Aid (additional langz)

Which of the following is not an element of estafa with That such thing pertains to his art or business.
unfaithfulness:
a) that he alters its substance, quantity or quality; -Chrizelle, BB
b) that such thing pertains to his art or business;
c) that the offender has an onerous obligation to deliver
something of value;
d) that there is damage or prejudice caused to another.
The factor that distinguishes grave threat from robbery with The directness, persistence and continuing nature of the intimidation employed Checked. - Ellaine
intimidation is: and the immediacy of gain obtained or intended.

a) the existence of a demand for money or property; -Chrizelle, BB
b) presence or absence of the element of intent of gain
c) the directness, persistence and continuing nature of the
intimidation employed and the immediacy of gain
obtained or intended;
d) attainment of the purpose of the offender.
Distinguish Estafa by Removing, Concealing, or Destroying a The crime of infidelity in the custody of documents, as defined in Art 226, and
Document from Infidelity in the Custody of Document. Estafa by removing, concealing, or destroying documents are similar in that the
manner of committing the offenses is the same.

But while under Art. 226, the offender is a public officer who is officially
entrusted with the document; in Estafa by removing, concealing or destroying
documents, the offender is a private individual or even a public officer who is
not officially entrusted with the documents.

In estafa, there is intent to defraud, This element is not required in infidelity in
the custody of documents.

-Chrizelle, Reyes
Distinguish when misappropriation constitutes Theft and when it Misappropriation that constitutes Theft:
constitutes Estafa. - In theft, the offender takes the thing
- A person who misappropriated the thing which he had received from
the offended party may be guilty of theft if he acquired only the
material or physical possession of the thing.

Misappropriation that constitutes Estafa:
- The offender receives the thing from the offended party

63
Thank you for your patience.
- In receiving the thing from the offended party, the offender acquired
also the juridical possession of the thing, and he later
misappropriated it.

-Tin, Reyes (p. 837)

Record shows that on October 12,2001 at around 6:30pm, about Yes, because in robbery with homicide it is immaterial that death would Checked. - Ellaine
four men entered the office of CDCI, located at No. 29 Evangelista supervene by mere accident or that the victim of homicide is other than the
St., Santolan, Pasig City, and declared a hold up. At least two victim of robbery.
robbers remained outside to serve as look-outs. At that time, five
CDCI employees, namely CB, ET, NP, MA and BR, were inside the -Chrizelle, BB
office preparing the pay envelopes of the employees. CB was then
reviewing the vouchers and signing checks when one of the hold- Additional info:
uppers, who was holding a gun and a grenade, positioned himself
beside her and ordered her: “Ilabas mo ang pera.” That man, whom It is immaterial that death would supervene by mere accident or that the victim
she identified in open Court, turned out to be AS. The four men left of homicide is other than the victim of robbery or that two or more persons are
after about five minutes, taking with them their loot consisting of killed. It is likewise not necessary to identify who among the conspirators
cash and personal belongings. Shortly after they gathered and inflicted the fatal would on the victim. Once a homicide is committed by reason
locked themselves inside a room, the five employees heard or on the occasion of robbery, the felony committed is the special complex
gunshots outside the Canscor office. One RM was hit by a bullet and crime of Robbery with Homicide (People v. Sorila, Jr. and Balausa, G.R. No.
died. Since nobody witnessed the details of the shooting and death 178549, June 27, 2008)
of RM, can AS validly argue that they cannot be convicted of
robbery with homicide because no proof was presented on the
matter surrounding the death of the victim and the identities of
the persons who shot him; and that since the crime of homicide
had not been proven, it cannot be complexed with robbery? Why?

*asked in MCQ form
(a) No, because it is necessary, at least, to identify who
among the conspirators inflicted the fatal wound on
the victim for it to be considered as committed by
reason or on the occasion of the robbery;
(b) No, because no proof appears on the matter
surrounding the death of the victim and the identities
of the persons who shot him; and that the since the
crime of homicide had not been proven, it cannot be
complexed with robbery;
(c) Yes, because in robbery with homicide it is immaterial
that death would supervene by mere accident or that
the victim of homicide is other than the victim of
robbery;
(d) No, because there is no connection between the
robbery and the homicide as it clearly appears that the
four malefactors have already left when RM was hit by
a bullet and died.

64
Thank you for your patience.
May the accused, in a prosecution for estafa under Article 315(1)(b) No. Demand is not an element of the felony or a condition precedent to the
of the RPC invoke as a defense the failure of the prosecution to filing of a criminal complaint for estafa. Indeed, the accused may be convicted of
prove that he had received a demand letter sent to him by the the felony under Article 315 (1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code if the prosecution
offended party or the latter’s counsel, even if the prosecution had has proved misappropriation or conversion by the accused of the money or
proven the fact of misappropriation or conversion by him? Why? property subject of the Information. In a prosecution for estafa, demand is not
necessary where there is evidence of misappropriation or conversion. (Ceniza-
Manantan v. People, G.R. No. 156248, August 28, 2007)

Demand is not required by law; however, it is necessary, because failure to
account, upon demand, is circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.

-Tin, Reyes and Jurisprudence (p. 834)
In an arson case, whether simple or destructive, where several “As a final attempt at exculpation, accused-appellant asserts that since the
deaths resulted as well, but the identities of the victim were never identities of the burned bodies were never conclusively established, she cannot
conclusively established, may the accused, in an attempt at be responsible for their deaths.
exculpation, assert that since the identities of the burned bodies
were never conclusively established, he cannot be held Such assertion is bereft of merit.
responsible for their deaths? Explain.
In the crime of arson, the identities of the victims are immaterial in that intent
to kill them particularly is not one of the elements of the crime. As we have
clarified earlier, the killing of a person is absorbed in the charge of arson, simple
or destructive. The prosecution need only prove, that the burning was
intentional and that what was intentionally burned is an inhabited house or
dwelling.”

(People v Malngan, GR 170470)

-Chrizelle, Jurisprudence
Which of the following may serve as basis to differentiate estafa The nature of the funds or property involved as public or private.
with abuse of confidence from malversation; (a) the circumstance
of the offender as being entrusted with funds or property; (b) the -Chrizelle, BB
nature of the funds or property involved as public or private; (c) the
continuing nature of the offense; (d) the resulting damage or
prejudice
X, having lost to Winner Y in the game of poker, intended to divest Y X should be convicted of robbery with homicide, for the killing and robbery of Y Checked. - Ellaine
of his winnings amounting to P20,000.00. In pursuit of his plan to and Z and for shots fired by X against PO W.
rob Y of his winnings, X shot and killed him as well as his
companion, Z. PO W, who was behind Y and Z, at that time, saw X -Chrizelle, BB.
and a companion running up a hill when, suddenly, he heard
gunshots and then saw Y and , who were then walking ahead of the
group, hit by the gunfire. By instant, PO W dove into a canal to save
himself from the continuous gunfire of X. PO W ran towards VA and
FA, who were walking behind the group, and informed the two that
Y and Z were ambushed by X and his companion. The three sought
help from the police authorities and returned to the scene of the
crime where they found Z, who was still alive and who narrated that
it was X and his companion who ambushed them and took the
money, estimated at P12,000.00, of Winner X which he won in the

65
Thank you for your patience.
card game. If prosecuted for this incident, (a) X should be convicted
of two crimes: [1] robbery, for the robbery of Y and Z; and [2]
homicide with attempted murder, for the killing of Y and Z and for
shots fired by X against PO W; (b) X should be convicted of two
crimes: [1] robbery with homicide, for the killing and robbery of Y
and Z; and [2] attempted murder, for shots fired by X against PO
W; (c) X should be convicted of robbery with homicide, for the
killing and robbery of Y and Z and for shots fired by X against PO
W; (d) X should be convicted of three crimes: [1] robbery, for the
robbery of Y and Z; [2] homicide, for the killing of Y and Z; and [3]
attempted murder, for shots fired by X against PO W.
AJ demanded money from MD and VR from the very start, plainly False.
manifesting his and his companion’s original intent to commit
robbery. VR freed his hands when AJ panicked in the course of the REASON: Clearly, AJ fired the shots in order to facilitate his escape and eliminate
event, ran outside the door and fired gunshots from the outside. his victims who could become witnesses against him and his companion. He
The gunshots killed VR. Under the circumstances, AJ can validly should, therefore, be convicted of the special complex crime of Robbery with
claim that since he had already run away from the house of the Homicide. (People v. Jabiniao, Jr. and Doe).
victim when he fired the gun and accidentally hit VR, the robbery
had already been accomplished when the killing occurred and,
therefore, he should not be convicted of a complex crime of
Robbery with Homicide but of two separate crimes of (1) Simple
Robbery and (2) Homicide.
On April 30, 1998, Spouses AW and AH went to the house of VC to c) the Spouses AW and AH committed estafa with abuse of confidence under
borrow 100,000. The money was supposed to be shown to the bank Art. 315 [1][b], RPC, because the amount was received by Spouses AW and AH
(“show money”) to make it appear that the Spouses A were for the sole purpose of using it as “show money” to the bank
financially liquid. On May 6, 1998, AW went back to VC’s house
where she received the amount and signed a Trust Undertaking, - Tin, BB
which stated: “For and in consideration of the trust conveyed upon
us, the undersigned hereby acknowledged the receipt of the amount Explanation: Spouses AW and AH received in trust the amount of 100,000 from
of 100,000 PESOS, PH currency, from MRS. VC said amount being VC; the amount was misappropriated or converted; such misappropriation or
extended and received by us not as loan or credit and without conversion was to the prejudice of VC; and VC demanded payment from
interest, nevertheless, we hereby undertake and commit to return the Spouses AW and AH. Thus, all the elements of estafa with abuse of confidence
same amount to said MRS. VC on or before July 18, 1998 without under Art. 315[1](b), RPC, are present. The amount was received by Spouses AW
need of prior demand”. When the obligation became due, VC went and AH for the sole purpose of using it as “show money” to the bank. The
to the spouses to demand payment but VC failed to collect the money was entrusted to AW for a particular purpose. Hence, AW did not
money. Under the circumstances, it may be concluded that (a) the acquire the right to dispose or spend the amount as she sees fit; she had the
Spouses AW and AH did not commit estafa with abuse of obligation to account for said amount. Furthermore, the Trust Undertaking
confidence under Art. 315[1][b], RPC since the amount was not expressly states that the amount was received by AW not as a loan or credit.
received as loan or credit; (b) the Spouses AW and AH committed Under the parol evidence rule, AW cannot vary the terms of the written
theft qualified with grave abuse of confidence under Art. 308/309, agreement, such as by claiming that the amount was received pursuant to a
RPC, since they never acquired juridical possession but only contract of sale of their lot (Asejo v. People, G.R. No. 157433, July 24, 2007)
material possession of the amount involved; (c) the Spouses AW
and AH committed estafa with abuse of confidence under Art. 315 (Resen, Quizzler 1D)
[1][b], RPC, because the amount was received by Spouses AW and
AH for the sole purpose of using it as “show money” to the bank;
(d) the Spouses AW and AH did not commit any crime since the
failure to return the amount received merely constituted a breach

66
Thank you for your patience.
of a purely civil obligation arising from the above-quoted provisions
of the contract.

AW signed a Trust Undertaking, which stated: “For and in False.

consideration of the trust conveyed upon us, the undersigned hereby
acknowledged the receipt of the amount of ONE HUNDRED REASON: Art. 315(1)(b), RPC explicitly includes money in its scope. The nature of
THOUSAND (P100,000.00) PESOS, Philippine currency, from Mrs. VC money, that is, the exact bills and coins received in trust cannot be returned, was
said amount being extended and received by us not as a loan or already considered by the law. As long as the money was received in trust, on
credit and without interest, nevertheless, we hereby undertake and commission for administration or under an obligation to return, failure to account
commit to return the same amount to said Mrs. VC on or before July for it upon demand is punishable under Art. 315(1)(b). Additionally, in a trust
18, 1998 without need of prior demand”. Under the circumstances, agreement, the transfer of the property to the trustee is mere physical
AW can assert that upon receipt of the said amount, it was possession and not juridical possession. Unlike in a contract of loan where the
transferred to her and she was not prohibited to use or spend the debtor acquires juridical possession and is technically the owner of the amount,
same because the very same money cannot be returned but only in a trust, the obligation of the trustee is fiduciary in nature i.e. to take care of
the same amount, thereby making the transaction a loan and not a the thing strictly for the benefit of the trustee in accordance with the purpose of
trust agreement; thus, her liability is merely civil and not criminal. the express trust. In the case at bar, the amount was received by the petitioner
for the sole purpose of using it as “show money” to the bank. The money was
entrusted to her for a particular purpose. Hence, she did not acquire the right to
dispose or spend the amount as she sees fit; she had the obligation to account for
said amount. Furthermore, the Trust Undertaking expressly states that the
amount was revised by AW not as a loan or credit. Under the parol evidence rule,
AW cannot vary the terms of the written agreement, such as by claiming that the
amount was received pursuant to a contract of sale of their lot (Asejo v. People).

(MM, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
The mere failure to return the thing received for safekeeping or on False.
commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to deliver or to return the same or deliver the REASON: The mere failure to return the thing received for safekeeping or on
value thereof to the owner constitutes the crime of estafa. commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving the
duty to deliver or to return the same or deliver the value thereof to the owner
could only give rise to a civil action and does not constitute the crime of estafa.
This is because the crime is committed by misappropriating or converting money
or goods received by the offender under a lawful transaction. The crime of estafa
is not committed by the failure to return the things received for sale or
commission, or to deliver their value, but, as this class of crime is defined by law,
by misappropriating or converting the money or goods received on commission.
Delay in the fulfillment of a commission or in the delivery of the sum on such
account received only involves civil liability. So long as the money that a person is
under obligation to deliver is not demanded from him, and he fails to deliver it
for having wrongfully disposed of it, there is no estafa, whatever be the cause of
the debt (Omictin v. CA and Lagos).

(MM, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

67
Thank you for your patience.
Where X entered the house of Y, a woman, took her money and c) Robbery with homicide, aggravated by rape.
jewelry, raped her and, then, killed her, the crime committed is
Explanation:
a) robbery with rape;
b) robbery with rape, aggravated by homicide; Robbery was the main intent and death resulted by reason of or on the occasion
c) robbery with homicide, aggravated by rape; thereof. Following Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code, rape should have
d) robbery with homicide only been appreciated as an aggravating circumstance instead.

The crime committed is robbery with homicide is punished by paragraph 1 of
article 294 of the Revised Penal Code with reclusion perpetua to death. The fact
that the crime was committed by a band and was accompanied by rape must be
considered as aggravating circumstances.
(People v. Ganal, G.R. L-1990 as cited in People v. Hipona, G.R. 185709)

Article 294 (1) Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
Any person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of
any person shall suffer:
The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death when by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime of homicide shall have been committed; or when the robbery
shall have been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson.

(Hazel, Reyes and Jurisprudence)

*True or False False, This is attempted robbery with homicide punishable under Art. 297 RPC,
Even if nothing in the evidence would show that the victim had a which states: “When by reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated
wristwatch and that the accused took said watch, as alleged in the robbery a homicide is committed, the person guilty of such offenses shall be
information, although the accused admitted in his confession that he punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua,
announced a hold-up with a loaded gun inside the victim’s taxicab unless the homicide committed shall deserve a higher penalty under the
and thereafter he and the victim grappled for his gun, but as they provisions of this Code.”
struggled, accused squeezed the trigger, thus shooting the victim to
death, then hurriedly getting off the taxicab, leaving his gun behind, (Resen, Quizzler 1D)
the accused should be convicted of robbery with homicide, because
the overt acts so far executed by him, including his announcement
of a hold up, clearly show his intention to rob the victim.

*True or False False.

AF issued the check to induce HS to execute a deed of sale in his favor. Such an agreement would be untenable where the claim that payee knew that
The Deed of Absolute Sale was signed after AF gave the checks to HS. the checks did not have sufficient funds was denied by the payee, who testified
AF did not dispute that at the time of the issuance of PNB Check No. that he was informed that drawer’s account was in good standing and that there
395532-S, AF’s account balance was only P1,026.53. AF closed his were significant funds for the postdated checks issued, and it was established
account on 27 May 1994, three months before the date indicated in that payee would not bare parted with his property if he knew that the checks
PNB Check No. 395532-S. Under the circumstances, AF can assert were not funded. (Firaza v. People, G.R. No. 154721, Mar. 22, 2007)
that he could not have committed deceit considering that even
without informing the payee of the check, the latter could already (Resen, Quizzler 1D)
have discerned that the checks had no funds because if he had
sufficient funds to pay the balance of the purchase price, he would (Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
not have issued the checks.

68
Thank you for your patience.
Additional:
No. AF committed deceit because the payee (aka HS) would not have parted
with his property if he knew that the checks were not funded. The elements of
estafa under paragraph 2(d), Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code are the
following: 1. postdating or issuance of a check in payment of an obligation
contracted at the time the check was issued; 2. lack of sufficiency of funds to
cover the check; and 3.damage to the payee. All the elements are present in
this case. AF did not dispute that at the time of the issuance of PNB Check No.
295532-S, AF's account balance was only P1,026.53. It was also established that
AF closed his account on 27 May 1994, three months before the date indicated
in PNB Check No. 395532-S. AF's claim that HS knew that the checks did not
have sufficient funds was denied by HS who testified that he was informed that
AF's account was in good standing and that there were sufficient funds for the
postdated checks issued. It was established that HS would not have parted with
his property if he knew that the checks were not funded.

This is actually the case of Firaza v. People (G.R. NO. 154721 : March 22, 2007).
You may read the orig here:
http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2007marchdecisions.php?id=278
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)

A raid was staged in the town of Tiaong, Quezon, between 8:00 and The crimes committed were sedition, multiple murder, arson, frustrated murder Checked. -Tin
9:00 in the evening of November 14, 2xxx, by armed men, who were and physical injuries.
members of the New People’s Army (NPA), resulting in the burning
down and complete destruction of the house of Mayor MP, We are convinced that the principal and main, though not necessarily the most
including its contents; the house of VR, and the house of one YM, serious, crime committed here was not rebellion but rather that of sedition. The
the death of Patrolman DP and civilians VS and LU, and the purpose of the raid and the act of the raiders in rising publicly and taking up
wounding of Patrolman PL and five civilians. During and after the arms was not exactly against the Government and for the purpose of doing
burning of the houses, some of the raiders engaged in looting, things denned in Art 134 of the RPC. The raiders did not even attack the seat of
robbing one house and two Chinese restaurants. The raiders were the local Government. Rather, the object was to attain by means of force,
dinally dispensed and driven from the town by the Philippine Army intimidation, etc., one object, to wit, to inflict an act of hate or revenge upon the
soldiers who came to reinforce those stationed in the town. The person or property of a public official, namely, MP who was then mayor of
raiders did not attack the seat of local Government. The object of Tiaong.
the raid was to kidnap or kill MP, who was then Mayor of Tiaong,
and destroy his house, on inducement of the latter’s political rival, (Ge-An, People v. Umali G.R. No. L-5803)
in preparation for the coming elections. What crime or crimes *The case was also mentioned in the Reyes Book!
was/were committed

The following [are] is not: special complex crime(s) defined in Robbery with frustrated homicide or murder
relation to robbery: (Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)

a) attempted or frustrated robbery with homicide;
b) robbery with rape
c) robbery with frustrated homicide or murder
d) robbery with homicide

69
Thank you for your patience.
The validity of the “demand”, for purposes of prosecution for estafa Dependent upon the authority of the person making the demand
under Art. 315[1](b), Revised Penal Code, is
a. not affected by the authority of the person making the (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
demand, for as long as such a demand was made
b. dependent upon the authority of the person upon whom REASON: A valid demand made by the offended party is one of the essential
the demand is made elements of estafa. So, where it appears from the records that the delay in the
c. dependent upon the authority of the person making the delivery of motor vehicles to a corporation by the person accused of estafa
demand under Article 315(1)(b), RPC, is by reason of the accused’s contention that the
d. dependent upon the authority of the person upon whom demand made upon him to return the subject vehicle is “not a valid demand”,
the demand was made and, at the same time, upon the the accused having earlier filed a case questioning therein the appointment of
authority of the person making the demand the persons making such demand, it is clear that a prejudicial question exists
which calls for the suspension of the criminal proceedings. Indeed, if the said
appointments are invalid, then the criminal case will eventually be dismissed
due to the absence of one of the essential elements of the crime of estafa. In
other words, where the alleged offended party is S, Inc., the validity of the
demand for the delivery of the subject vehicles rests upon the authority of the
persons making such a demand on the company’s behalf. If the accused is
challenging the authority of the persons making the demand to act for S, Inc. in a
pending corporate case, then the validity of the appointment of such persons
constitutes a prejudicial question because if the supposed authority of such
persons is found to be defective, it is as if no demand was ever made, hence, the
prosecution for estafa cannot prosper. (Omictin v. CA and Lagos)

(MM, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C, Appeared in T/F format)


Title XI – Crimes Against Chastity
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
Where X, a policeman, pretended to arrest a 15 year old girl, who is He is liable for qualified seduction because he is a person in public authority and Checked. -Tin
a no longer a physically a virgin but of good reputation, for such term includes any person exercising public authority, whether directly or as
jaywalking, and took her to a certain house where he had sexual an agent.
intercourse with the girl with her consent, what is the crime (2018 Midterms Samplex)
committed by X?
Art 337 - Qualified Seduction.
In this case the elements of qualified seduction is present:
1. The offended party is a Virgin, which is presumed of she is unmarried and of
good reputation;
2. She must be over 12 and below 18 years of age;
3. That the offender had sexual intercourse with her;
4. That there is abuse of authority, confidence or relationship on the part of the
offender.

The law defines a virgin who is a woman of chaste character or a woman of good
reputation. Virginity in this sense does not mean physical virginity.

The fact that the girl gave consent to the sexual intercourse is no defense.
Beda Memaid (p. 264) & Reyes (p. 958-964)

70
Thank you for your patience.

(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
A brother who, knowing his sister to be married, had consented Adultery Checked. - Chrizelle
sexual intercourse with her committed:
a. Adultery (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014) RPC Art 333 Adultery is committed by any
b. Concubinage maried woman who shall have sexul
c. Qualified Seduction intercourse with a man not her husband and
d. No Crime by the man who has carnal knowledge of her
knowing her to be married, even if the
marraige be subsequently declared void.
X, a policeman who pretended to arrest a 15-year old girl, who is no The policeman is a person in public authority and such term includes any person Checked. - Ellaine
longer physically a virgin but is of good reputation, for vagrancy, exercising public authority, whether directly or as an agent
and who took her to a certain house where he had sexual
intercourse with the girl with her consent, is liable for qualified (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
seduction because:
a. the policeman is a person in public authority and such
term includes any person exercising public authority,
whether directly or as an agent
b. the girl was not raped but consented to the sexual
intercourse
c. the girl is unmarried and of good reputation
d. the girl is under 18 years of age and of good reputation

Title XII – Crimes Against The Civil Status of Persons Against Honor
Samplex Question Answer
Distinguish bigamy from adultery. In bigamy, the first marriage between the offender and the offended spouse must be valid and
the offender contracts a second or subsequent marriage with another. While in adultery, it is not
*Can also fall under Title 11 (re: adultery) necessary that there be a valid marriage between the offended husband and the guilty woman.
There is adultery, even if the marriage of the guilty woman with the offended husband is
subsequently declared void. Moreover, bigamy can be committed by either the husband or wife,
while adultery is committed by the wife. Bigamy is a public offense, while adultery is a private
offense.

(Ge-An, Reyes)


Title XIII – Crimes Against Honor
Samplex Question Answer Checker’s Notes
To sustain a conviction of a publisher for libel under Art. 360 of the d) it is not necessary that the publisher knowingly participated in or consented Checked. -Chrizelle
Revised Penal Code to the preparation and publication of the libelous article, but he must be shown
to have acted as “author, editor, or proprietor” despite his designation as
a) it is mandatory (or required) that the publisher “printer/publisher”
knowingly participated in or consented to the
preparation and publication of the libelous article and (Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)
that he has acted as “author, editor, or proprietor”
despite his designation as “printer/publisher”; Proof of knowledge and participation in the publication of the offending article
is not required, if the accused has been specifically identified as “author, editor

71
Thank you for your patience.
b) it is not necessary the publisher knowingly participated of proprietor” or “printer/ publisher” of the publication (Fermin vs. People)
in or consented to the preparation and publication of the (Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)
libelous article
c) it is mandatory (or required) that the publisher
knowingly participated in or consented to the
preparation and publication of the libelous article
d) it is not necessary that the publisher knowingly
participated in or consented to the preparation and
publication of the libelous article, but he must be shown
to have acted as “author, editor, or proprietor” despite
his designation as “printer/publisher”
The pertinent portion of X’s complaint-affidavit for incriminating an DC, Jr. cannot be held liable for the crime of incriminating an innocent person; Checked. -Chrizelle
innocent person reads: “14. In light of this newly discovered (Hazel, Finals Exam 1-D, March 23, 2013)
evidence, the complaint of Seishin International Corporation[,]
represented by Mr. DC, Jr.[,] and the testimony of the latter in
support of the complaint are false, unfounded and malicious
because they imputed to me a crime of Estafa which in the first
place I did not commit, as evidenced by the fact that the subject
two (2) units of roadrollers, Sakai brand, subject of the criminal
complaint before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasig City by
the corporation through Mr. DC, Jr., and the information filed in
court, had been purchased by me in cash from the said corporation
and had already been paid on June 28, 1993. On the basis thereof,

a) DC, Jr. cannot be held liable for the crime of
incriminating an innocent person, but is liable for false
testimony against X;
b) DC, Jr. cannot be held liable for the crime of
incriminating an innocent person;
c) DC, Jr. cannot be held liable of incriminating an innocent
person, but is liable for malicious prosecution of X;
d) DC, Jr. should be held liable for the crime of
incriminating an innocent person
Intriguing against honor is similar to defamation in that they both: Aim to blemish the honor or reputation of another Checked. -Chrizelle
a. Aim to blemish the honor or reputation of another
b. Involve the use of written or spoken words (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
c. Involve some tricky and secret plots against another
d. Require publicity
Who are guilty of corruption of minors? Under Art. 340, it is any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution Checked. -Tin
or corruption of persons under age to satisfy the lust of another.

Full article:
Art. 340. Corruption of Minors - Any person who shall promote or facilitate the
prostitution or corruption of persons under age to satisfy the lust of another,
shall be punished by prision mayor and if the culprit is a public officer or
employee, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, he
shall also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute disqualification. (As
amended by B.P Blg. 92, approved on Dec. 24,1980)

72
Thank you for your patience.
(Reyes, 928)
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
What is libel and what are privileged communications? "Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real Checked. -Tin
or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status or circumstance tending to
cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to
blacken the memory of one who is dead.

Privileged communications are (1) those private communication made by any
person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty and (2)
a fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks,
of any judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings which are not of
confidential nature, or of any statement, report, or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of
thier functions."
Arts. 353 and 354 of RPC
p. 1036 of Reyes
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
What matters are covered by the "Gag Law"? gag orders are regarded as prior restraints on the freedom of speech and
freedom of the press, a government official who proposes it would be faced
with a heavy burden of making a compelling justification for making that
restriction.

a “gag order” preventing the press from publishing information concerning the
defendant’s confession or other facts “strongly implicative” of the accused, was
regarded as an unconstitutional prior restraint on media coverage during
criminal trials.

Additional notes:
A "gag law" may limit freedom of the press, by instituting censorship or
restricting access to information.

-Chrizelle
(Copied from Quizzler 1-F 2019)
Which of the following is not a criterion in determining whether The intent of the offender Checked. -Chrizelle
slander by deed is of a serious nature:
a. The circumstances under which the act was committed (Resen, Final Exam, March 26,2014)
b. The occasion, etc., in which it took place
c. The social standing of the offended party
d. The intent of the offender
How is incriminatory machination committed? By incriminating innocent person under Art. 363 and by intriguing against
honour under Art. 364, both under Title 13 RPC. The former is committed when
the offender performs an act, and by such act he directly incriminates or
imputes to an innocent person the commission of a crime, provided that such
act does not constitute perjury. It is limited to acts of "planting" evidence and
the like, which do not in themselves constitute false prosecutions but tend
directly to cause false prosecutions. While the latter is committed by any
person who shall make any intrigue which has for its principal purpose to
blemish the honour or reputation of another person. It is any scheme or plot

73
Thank you for your patience.
designed to blemish the reputation of a person by means which consist of
some trickery.

(Salud, Reyes)
In the context of the law on libel, (a) discuss the notion of (a) Where the communication is privileged, malice is not presumed from the
“privileged communication”, its types and the legal consequences defamatory words. The presumption of malice does not arise in the two cases
thereof; (b) when is “proof of truth” a defense of privileged communication mentioned in paragraph Nos. 1 and 2 of Art. 354.

There are 2 types of privileged communications, the absolute and the
conditional or qualified. A communication is said to be absolutely privileged
when it is not actionable, even if its author has acted in bad faith. This class
includes statements made by members of Congress in the discharge of their
functions as such, official communications made by public officers in the
performance of their duties, and allegations or statements made by the parties
or their counsel in their pleadings or motions or during the hearing of judicial
proceedings, as well as the answers given by witnesses in reply to questions
propounded to them, in the course of said proceedings, provided that said
allegations or statements are relevant to the issues, and the answers are
responsive or pertinent to the questions propounded to said witnesses.

On the other hand, conditionally or qualifiedly privileged communications are
those which, although containing defamatory imputations, would not be
actionable unless made with malice or bad faith. It has, moreover, been held
that there is malice when the defamer has been prompted by ill-will or spite
and speaks not in response to duty, but merely to injure the reputation of the
person defamed.

(b) Proof of truth is a defense:
1. The defamatory imputation is true, in case the law allows proof of
truth of the imputation
2. It is published with good intention; and
3. There is a justifiable motive for making it

(Ge-An, Reyes)
The rules on venue in cases of criminal libel apply only to those NO
ledged by public officers and, therefore, have no application to Those rules do not lay a distinction that only those actions for criminal libel
those filed by private persons, since the protection of members of lodged by public officers need be filed in the place of printing and first
the mass media from frivolous libel suits filed by public officers in publication. In fact, the rule is quite clear that such place of printing and first
far-flung places appears to have been the motivating force behind publication stands as one of only two venues where a private person may file
the amendments to RPC Art 360, and therefore, a more liberal the complaint for libel, the other venue being the place of residence of the
interpretation of the provision should obtain if the complainant offended party at the time the offense was committed. The very language itself
were a private person of RPC Art 360, as amended, does not support the thesis that where the
complainant is a private person, a more liberal interpretation of the phrase
"printed and first published" is warranted than when a public officer is the
offended party. Where the law does not distinguish, we should not distinguish.
CHAVEZ and PEOPLE v CA

(Chrizelle, Reviewer, Finals 2016 Compilation)

74
Thank you for your patience.
(Abby, Appeared as T/F in Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)

(a) In the law on libel, what is meant by “malice in law” and (a) Malice in law means that in cases of libel, malice is always presumed
the relevance of that concept in reaching a conviction for unless show that the communication is a privileged one. Unless the
libel accused shows that the communication is not malicious or a
(b) Discuss the rules on venue in the filing of libel cases, privileged one, he will be convicted for libel (Note: this is in essay,
indicating in particular to whom they are meant to apply. pero perfect score naman)
(JUNE 2018 Finals, Nico)
(b) Article 360 provides: The criminal and civil action for damages in
cases of written defamations as provided for in this chapter, shall be
filed simultaneously or separately with the court of first instance of
the province or city where the libelous article is printed and first
published or where any of the offended parties actually resides at
the time of the commission of the offense: Provided, however, That
where one of the offended parties is a public officer whose office is
in the City of Manila at the time of the commission of the offense,
the action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the City of
Manila, or of the city or province where the libelous article is
printed and first published, and in case such public officer does not
hold office in the City of Manila, the action shall be filed in the Court
of First Instance of the province or city where he held office at the
time of the commission of the offense or where the libelous article
is printed and first published and in case one of the offended parties
is a private individual, the action shall be filed in the Court of First
Instance of the province or city where he actually resides at the time
of the commission of the offense or where the libelous matter is
printed and first published: Provided, further, That the civil action
shall be filed in the same court where the criminal action is filed and
vice versa: Provided, furthermore, That the court where the criminal
action or civil action for damages is first filed, shall acquire
jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts: And, provided, finally,
That this amendment shall not apply to cases of written
defamations, the civil and/or criminal actions which have been filed
in court at the time of the effectivity of this law.

Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written defamations
as provided for in the chapter shall be conducted by the provincial
or city fiscal of the province or city, or by the municipal court of the
city or capital of the province where such action may be instituted in
accordance with the provisions of this article.

No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation
of a crime which cannot be prosecuted de oficio shall be brought
except at the instance of and upon complaint expressly filed by the
offended party.
(Note: I looked for a better answer bc the samplex just got 1.5/2.5
and sir wrote down Art 360 in the samplex, JUNE 2018 Nico)

75
Thank you for your patience.
B, Jr. admits having written a letter alleged to contain a Yes, B, Jr. is liable for libel, For the requisite of publicity to be present, it is
libelous imputation. The letter itself states that the same enough that the letter is read to a third person. Also, the letter was not sealed
was copy furnished to all concerned. Also, B, Jr. had in an envelope and was open for everyone to read.
dictated the letter to his secretary. Finally, the letter, (Note: Not MCQ pero perfect naman score. JUNE 2018 Finals Nico)
when found in the mailbox, was open, not contained in
an envelope. Under the circumstances, is B, Jr. liable for
libel; why?
The pertinent portion of X's complaint-affidavit for incriminating an False. RPC Art 363 does not, however, contemplate the idea of malicious
innocent person reads: prosecution- someone prosecuting or instigating a criminal charge in court. It
"14. In light of this newly discovered evidence, the complaint of refers "to the acts of PLANTING evidence and the like, which do not in
themselves constitute false prosecution but tend directly to cause false
Seishin International corporation, represented by Mr. DC, Jr, and
prosecution." Where the complainant do not pretend, neither have they
the testimony of the latter in support of the complaint are false, alleged in their complaint that the accused has planted evidence against them
unfounded and malicious because they imputed to me a crime of but, at the most, what the accused is alleged to have done is that he had filed
Estafa which in the first place I did not commit, as evidenced by the the criminal complaint against the complainant without justifiable cause or
fact that the subject two (2) units of roadrollers, Sakay brand, motive and had caused the same to be prosecuted, with him, (accused)
subject of the criminal complaint before the Office of the City testifying falsely as witness for the prosecution, it has been held that these
Prosecutor of Pasig City by the corporation through Mr. DC, Jr., and acts do not constitute incriminatory machination, particularly because RPC ARt
363 punishing said crime expressly excludes Perjury a s a means of committing
the information filed in court, had been purchased by me in cash
the same. Evidently, DC may not, under said complaint-affidavit, be charged
from the said corporation and had already been paid on June 28, with the crime of Incriminating Innocent Person under RPC Art 363.
1993." On the basis thereof, DC Jr. should be held liable for the Parenthetically, the complainant X's conviction bars even the filing of a
crime of incriminating an innocent person. criminal case for False Testimony against DC. (Campanano J. v. Datuin)


(Abby, Undated Samplex, Sec 1-C)


Title XIV – Quasi- Offenses
Samplex Question Answer

Title XV – FINAL PROVS
Samplex Question Answer

76