ROBBERY

- Taking of personal property belonging to another with the intent to gain—

- By means of:
1. Violence or intimidation (Arts 294, 297-298); or
2. By use of force upon things (Arts 299 & 302)

ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY

1. Personal property belonging to another

a. Note: if real property or right is occupied or usurped — crime is usurpation
2. Unlawful taking of property
3. With intent to gain
4. [Existence of] violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon anything

- Note: Real property is estate

PROHIBITIVE ARTICLES SUCH AS OPIUM MAY BE THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ROBERRY

(US vs Sana Lim)

“BELONGING TO ANOTHER”

- One who, by means of violence or intimidation, took his own property from the depositary is
not guilty of robbery
o Same applies with co-owner or partner
- The person from whom the personal property is taken NEED NOT to be the owner — possession
of the property is sufficient
- Instance: the owner of property may be guilty of robbery when, for instance, he takes it from
the possession of a bailee, with intent to charge the bailee with its value (US vs Albao)
- Instance: A delivered a package to B by mistake, when A asked B to return thereof, B threatened
to kill him if A would get it back. B is not liable for robbery because he did not take the property
from A

IS THE NAME OF THE OWNER ESSENTIAL? — it depends

1. If the crime charged is robbery with homicide — Yes.

2. If the crime charged is robbery resulting in physical injuries — No

- Case: US vs Lahoylahoy
o Accused where prosecuted for robbery with multiple homicide. The information alleged
that the property taken belonged to Roman Estriba, however, the proof showed that
the person robbed was Juana Seran. The court decided that it is impossible to convict
the accused of robbery. Hence, the accused are convicted only to four separate counts
of homicide.

ROBBERY CAN BE COMMITTED ONLY BY TAKING AGAINST OTHER’S WILL

 - Instance: Where the accused received jewels in trust from the owner’s agent.  He cannot be
held liable, because he did not “take” the jewels (US vs Alcantara)

THE TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY MUST BE UNLAWFUL

WHEN UNLAWFUL MISAPPROPRIATION WAS SUBSEQUENT TO SUCH TAKING

- The crime is estafa or malversation (US vs Atienza)

Sana Lim Case

ROBBERY IS CONSUMMATED IN:

1. Robbery with violence or intimidation

a. When the robber acquires the possession of the property
2. Robbery with force
a. After the accused had taken material possession of the thing
i. Instance: When the accused entered the bodega through an opening in the roof
and were already in possession of two cases of corned beef but were unable to
remove because the watchmen discovered the robbery (P vs Saldua)

TAKING MUST DEPRIVE THE OFFENDED PARTY OF THE THING TAKEN WITH PERMANENCY

- Instance: Thus, if A was the owner of the gun kept in a drawer which was locked. Then B,
forcefully obtained the gun to threaten A with the said gun. The court decided that B had no
intention of depriving A with permanency, since he only used it at that time frame to threaten A.
(P vs Kho Choc)

THE TAKING SHOULD NOT BE UNDER CLAIM OF OWNERSHIP

INTENT TO GAIN

- Being an internal act, it cannot be established by direct evidence, except in case of confession by
the accused. However, it may be presumed by the court from the proven unlawful taking.
- Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal property grave coercion IF there is
violenced used (Art 286)

VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION
(Del Rosario vs P)

INTIMIDATION NEED NOT TO BE THREAT OF BODILY HARM

- Intimidation exists when it causes fear or fright to the victim

- Example: threat of arrest and prosecution, pointing a gun or a knife to the victim

Flores vs P

THE VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION MUST BE PRESENT BEFORE THE TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
 - Note: if not, crimes are: theft + physical injuries or grave threats
- EXCEPTION: violence results in:
(Complex crimes)
1. Homicide
2. Rape
3. Intentional mutilation
4. Serious physical injuries
o Note: these form special complex crimes

TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY NEED NOT BE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE INTIMIDATION

- Example: Kidnapping with ransom

USING OF FORCE

- Culprit must enter a house or building (Art 299)

o EXCEPTION: not necessary when the robbery is committed by breaking wardrobes or
any locked object inside an inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to
religious worship

VIOLENCE/INTIMIDATION VS FORCE

VIOLENCE/INTIMIDATION FORCE
Penalty depends on the result of the violence Penalty is based on the value
used (Value is immaterial)

ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE/INTIMIDATION + USE OF FORCE = COMPLEX CRIME

- PENALTY: robbery with violence/intimidation in its maximum period

o Rationale: Violence or intimidation is the controlling qualification, which is graver than
ordinary robbery committed by force

RA 10883 — ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT OF 2016

- Special law, therefore different from the crime of robbery and theft [included in the RPC]
- Carnapping is the taking with intent to gain of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the
latter’s consent or by means of violence/intimidation, or by force.
o Note: taking without consent is sufficient
- PENALTY
o Imprisonment of 20yrs and 1 day – 30yrs (simple carnapping)
o Imprisonment for 30yrs and 1 day – 40yrs (carnapping with violence/intimidation or
force)
o Life imprisonment (carnapping with homicide or rape)
- Carnapping is a non-bailable offense
- QUALIFIED CARNAPPING (carnapping with homicide)
o Special complex crime similar to robbery with homicide
o In case, carnapping is not proved, the homicide/murder is punishable under the RPC
 - When the purpose of taking the car is to destroy by burning it  crime is arson
- Note: Offender is liable for carnapping of a whole car even if only parts are taken away

ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION

ART 294. PENALTIES

Robbery with homicide/rape/mutilation/arson Reclusion perpetua

Robbery with physical injuries (subdivision 1 Art Reclusion temporal – med
263)
Robbery with physical injuries (subdivision 2 Art Reclusion temporal
263)
Robbery with physical injuries (subdivision 3 & 4 Prision mayor – max  Reclusion temporal - med
Art 263)
Robbery [in other cases (as amended by RA Prision correccional – max  Prision mayor - med
7659)]

- Note: must be serious physical injuries [or else it will be absorbed]

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE

- Homicide must be committed by reason or on the occasion of robbery if it is committed to:

1. Facilitate the robbery or escape
2. Preserve the possession of the loot
3. Prevent discovery of the commission of the robbery
4. Eliminate witness to the commission of the crime

[ROBBERY AND HOMICIDE]

- Note: homicide must have a direct connection with the robbery

o Instance: After the robbery, the police caught the robbers. He was then killed by one of
them. Since the killing was distinct from the robbery  the appellants were charged
with robbery; and robbery and homicide; respectively. (P vs Quemeggen)
- Note: robbery should be the main objective; killing was incidental (P vs Salazar)
o Instance: When the idea of taking money and other personal property of the victums
was conceived by the culprits after the killing  charged with 2 separate crimes of
homicide or murder and theft

THERE IS NO SUCH CRIME AS ROBBERY WITH MURDER

- Treachery cannot be considered as QAC of murder, because the crime charged is the special
crime of robbery with homicide

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE IN A DWELLING DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON
THINGS IS FIRST COMMITTED

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE NEED NOT BE COMMITTED INSIDE A BUILDING

HOMICIDE MAY PRECEDE OR MAY OCCUR AFTER ROBBERY

 - [So long as the reasons are the requisites mentioned above]

IS IT ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE IF THE PERSON KILLED IS A ROBBER HIMSELF?

- Yes. The law does not require that the person killed is the owner of the property taken

IS IT ROBERY WITH HOMICIDE EVEN IF THE DEATH OF A PERSON SUPERVENED BY MERE ACCIDENT?

- Yes. Provided that the homicide was produced by reason or on the occasion of robbery

ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE OR ATTEMPTED MURDED COMMITTED DURING THE OCCASION OF THE

ROBBERY IS ABSORBED IN THE CRIME OF ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE

MUST THE PERSON CHARGED AS ACCESSORY HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE COMMISSION OF BOTH
ROBBERY AND HOMICIDE?

- No. Complicity must accordingly be limited to robbery, not with the killing.

ALL WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE ROBBERY AS PRINCIPALS ARE PRINCIPALS IN ROBBERY WITH
HOMICIDE

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE DISTINGUISHED FROM HIGHWAY ROBBERY

— P853 Reyes book

ROBBERY WITH RAPE

- [Like in robbery with homicide] the intent to gain must precede the rape

THERE IS NO SUCH CRIME AS ROBBERY WITH ATTEMPTED RAPE

ALTHOUGH, THERE CAN BE ATTEMPTED RAPE AND THEFT

- P vs Buena

EVEN IF THE RAPE WAS COMMITTED IN ANOTHER PLACE, IT IS STILL ROBBERY WITH RAPE

- Case: 2 offenders compelled 2 women, living in the house where the robbery was committed to
with them. They were raped in a place near the river. (US vs Tiongco)
o Note: if the rape is committed in a house other than that where the robbery is
committed, the rape should be considered a separate offense

EVEN IF THE RAPE WAS COMMITTED BEFORE THE ROBBERY, IT IS STILL ROBBERY WITH RAPE

- So long as the robbery was the primary objective

[ROBBERY AND RAPE]

- If the original plan was to rape but the culprit after committing the rape also committed robbery
when the opportunity presented itself  separate crimes of robbery and rape
ADDITIONAL RAPES COMMITTED ON THE SAME OCCASION OF ROBBERY WILL NOT INCREASE THE
PENALTY

CIVIL LIABILITY FOR ROBBERY WITH RAPE

1. Indemnification — P100,000 (P vs Jugueta)

2. Acknowledgment of the offspring
3. Support to the offspring

THERE CAN BE RAPE WITH HOMICIDE AND RAPE

- With rape being considered as AC

ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES

ROBBERY WITH UNNECESSARY VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION

- Instance: Tying the victim after wounding him and leaving him tied to the trunk of a trea after
taking his money (P vs Manzanilla)

REQUISITES UNDER 2ND CASE OF PAR 4 (PERSON NOT RESPONSIBLE)

1. Physical injuries defined in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Art 263 was inflicted in the course of the
robbery
2. That any of them was inflicted upon any person not responsible for the commission of the
robbery

SIMPLE ROBBERY

VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION NEED NOT TO BE PRESENT BEFORE OR AT THE EXACT MOMENT WHEN
THE OBJECT IS TAKEN

OTHER CASES:

1. Snatching money from the hands of the victim and pushing her to prevent her from recovering
the seized property (US vs Samonte)
2. Grabbing pawn ticket from the hands of another and intimidating him (US vs Blanco)

ROBBERY THROUGH INTIMIDATION VS THREAT TO EXTORT MONEY

Intimidation Threat
Actual and immediate Conditional or future
Personal Intermediary
Directed to the person of the victim May refer to the person, honor, or property of
the offended party
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE VS GRAVE COERCION

- In both crimes, there is violence used by the offender

Robbery with violence Grave coercion

Intent to gain —
Taking somebody’s property Compel another to do something against his
will

ROBBERY VS BRIBERY

Robbery Bribery
Neither voluntary nor mutual Transaction is mutual and voluntary
Victim is deprived of his money or property by He parts with his money or property in a sense
the use of force or intimidation voluntary

ART 295. ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES + QAC

1. Inhabited place
2. By a band (At least 4 armed men)
3. By attacking a moving train, streetcar, motor vehicle, or airship
4. By entering the passenger’s compartments in a train, or in any manner taking the passengers
thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances
5. On street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made with the use of firearms

BEING QAC, IT CANNOT BE OFFSET BY A GMC

IT DOES NOT APPLY WITH ART 294

ART 296. DEFINITION OF BAND (ROBBERY)

- At least 4 armed men

- If the arms are not licensed  + illegal possession of firearms

REQUISITES:

1. Member of the band

2. Present at the commission of a robbery
3. Other members of the band committed an assault
4. He did not attempt to prevent the assault

WHEN THE ROBBERY WAS NOT COMMITTED BY A BAND  THE ROBBER WHO DID NOT TAKE PART IN
THE ASSAULT BY ANOTHER IS NOT LIABLE FOR THAT ASSAULT

- EXCEPTION: When there is a conspiracy to commit homicide and robbery, all the conspirators,
even if less than 4 armed men, are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide
o Same applies even if the conspiracy was for robbery, but homicide was committed

PROOF OF CONSPIRACY IS NOT NECESSARY IF COMMITTED BY A BAND

ANY MEMBER OF A BAND WHO IS PRESENT AT THE TIME OF COMMISSION OF A ROBBERY BY THE
BAND

- A PI who did not go with the band at the place of the commission of the robbery is not liable for
robbery with homicide, only robbery in band

THERE IS NO CRIME AS ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE IN BAND

RAPE IS NOT CONSIDERED “ANY OF THE ASSAULTS COMMITTED BY THE BAND”

- The one who raped without the knowledge of his companions, will be the only one guilty of
robbery with rape

ART 297. ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY

THERE IS ONLY ONE CRIME OF ATTEMPTED ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE EVEN IF SLIGHT PHYSICAL
INJURIES WERE INFLICTED ON OTHER PERSONS ON THE OCCASION OR BY REASON OF THE ROBBERY

- P vs Casalme

THERE IS AN ATTEMPTED, FRUSTRATED, AND CONSUMMATED ROBBERY

ART. 298. EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR INTIMDATION

ELEMENTS:

1. Offender has intent to defraud another

2. Offender compels him to sign, execute, or deliver any public instrument or document
3. Compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation

DOCUMENT MUST BE A PRIVATE OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT

IT IS NOT APPLICABLE IF THE DOCUMENT IS VOID

ROBBERY BY THE USE OF FORCE UPON THINGS

- The offender entered a house or building

- Broke a wardrobe,.. or any other locked [object]

2 KINDS OF ROBBERY WITH FORCE

1. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to worship(Art 299)

2. Robbery in an uninhabited place or private building (Art 302)

ART 299. ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP

ROBBERY WITH FORCE UNDER SUBDIVISION (A)

ELEMENTS:

1. Offender entered (a) an inhabited place, or (b) public building, or (c) edifice devoted to worship
2. The entrance was effected by any of the following means:
 a. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or breaking any door, or window
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority
3. That once inside the building, the offender took personal property belong to another with intent
to gain

THE PLACE ENTERED MUST BE A HOUSE OR BUILDING

- Instance: when the culprit enters the parked automobile…  crime is theft

INHABITED HOUSE INCLUDES:

- Any shelter, ship or vessel constituting dwelling

PUBLIC BUILDING INCLUDES:

- Every building owned by the Government or belonging to a private person but used or rented by
the Government, although temporarily unoccupied by the same (Art 301)

THE WHOLE BODY OF CULPRIT MUST BE INSIDE THE BUILDING TO CONSTITUTE ENTERING

THE WALL MUST BE AN OUTSIDE WALL

THE OUTSIDE DOOR MUST BE BROKEN

- If not, the crime is theft

THE GENUINE KEY MUST BE STOLEN, NOT TAKEN BY FORCE OR INTIMIDATION

THE FALSE KEY OR PICKLOCK MUST BE USED TO ENTER THE BUILDING

IT IS ONLY THEFT WHEN THE FALSE KEY IS USED TO OPEN WARDROBE OR LOCKED RECEPTACLE OR
DRAWER OR INSIDE DOOR

THE USE OF A FICTITIOUS NAME OR THE ACT OF PRETENDING TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY MUST BE TO
ENTER THE BUILDING

ROBBERY WITH FORCE UNDER SUBDIVISION (B)

ELEMENTS:

1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public building, or edifice devoted to… worship, regardless
of the circumstances under which he entered it
2. Offender takes personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, under any of the
following circumstances
a. By breaking of doors,.. or locked [objects]
b. By taking such furniture away or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the
place of the robbery

ENTRANCE INTO A BUILDINGS MENTIONED IN SUBDIVISION (A) IS NOT REQUIRED IN SUBDIVISION (B)
IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THE SEALED BOX IS OPENED, SO LONG AS IT WAS TAKEN OUT FOR THE
PURPOSE OF BREAKING IT OUTSIDE

INSTANCES WHERE IT IS ESTAFA OR THEFT

Estafa Theft
A person who opens by force a locked object When a locked object is found on the street and
which has been confided into his custody and is forcibly opened and the contents thereof are
takes the money therein

PENALTIES

Armed + < P50,000 Reclusion Temporal

Unarmed + < P50,000 Prision Mayor
Armed + P50,000 Prision Mayor
Unarmed + P50,000 Prision Mayor – min
Dependency of inhabited house, public building, Next lower om degree than those specified above
or edifice devoted to… worship

ART 300. ROBBERY IN AN (1) UNINHABITED PLACE AND (2) BY A BAND

 ART 299 BECOMES QUALIFIED

ART 301. INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC BUILDING, OR EDIFICE DEDICATED TO WORHSIP

“RULES” IN INHABITED HOUSE

- Any shelter, even though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent therefrom when the
robbery is committed
o There is still a crime of robbery even in sunken ship

DEPENDENCIES REQUISITES

1. Must be contiguous to the building

2. Must have an interior entrance connected therewith
3. Must form part of the whole
- Example: A small store located on the ground floor of the house belonging to the owner of the
store — house and the storm form a single whole, there being no partition between them

ORCHARDS AND LANDS USED FOR CULTIVATION ARE NOT DEPENDENCIES

ART 302. ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING

ELEMENTS:

1. The offender entered an uninhabited place or building which was not a dwelling house, and not
a public building

TAKING OF MAIL MATTER IN ANY KIND OF ROBBERY MAKES THE PENALTY HIGHER BY 1 DEGREE
TAKING OF LARGE CATTLE IS NOT PUNISHED UNDER RPC, BUT UNDER ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW OF
1974

MOTOR VEHICLE, COCONUTS [IN PLANTATION], AND FISH [IN FISHPOND] RE NOT INCLUDED

ART 299 VS ART 302

ART 299 ART 302

If the store is used as a dwelling — it is an If the store was not actually occupied at the time
inhabited house under Art 299 (P vs Suarez) of the robbery and was not used as a dwelling,
since the owner lived in a separate house (P vs
Silvestre)

ART 303. ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS, OR FIREWOOD IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE

BUILDING

WHEN THE ABOVEMENTIONED ARE TAKEN IN ROBBERY WITH FORCE  PENALTY IS 1 DEGREE LOWER

ART 304. POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR TOOLS

ELEMENTS:

1. Offender has in his possession picklocks or similar tools

2. Such picklocks or similar tools are specially adopted to the commission of robbery
3. Offender does not have lawful cause for such possession

LIABILITY OF A LOCKSMITH

- Penalty is higher than that of a mere possessor

ART 305. FALSE KEYS

1. Tools mentioned in the next preceding article

2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock forcibly opened…

POSSESSION OF FALSE KEYS IN PARS 2 & 3 OF ART 305 IS NOT PUNISHABLE

- For it to be punishable, it needed to be used in robbery

INSTANCES:

1. A entrusted the key of the main door of his house to B. One day, B used the key in opening the
door of A’s house, and once inside took some personal belonging  not guilty of robbery
because the key was not stolen, it being entrusted to him
2. A suggested to B that he should take an impression of the key of the warehouse in soap paste
and have another made by a locksmith. With the key made from the impression, B was able to
open the warehouse from which he took the cases of whisky  robbery with the use of false
key (US vs Galuran)
 THEFT

- Committed by any person who, with intent to gain but without violence/intimidation nor force,
shall take personal property of another without the latter’s consent

ART. 308. WHO ARE LIABLE FOR THEFT?

1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to deliver the same to the local authorities
or to its owner
2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the property of another, shall remove or
make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by him
3. Any person who shall enter an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden or which
belongs to another and without the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon the same or
shall gather fruits, cereals, or other forest or farm products

ELEMENTS

1. Taking of personal property

2. Said property belongs to another
3. Intent to gain
4. Without the consent of the owner
5. Taking was accomplished without the use of violence/intimidation nor force

THERE’S ONLY CONSUMMATED AND ATTEMPTED THEFT

- Note: SC did not adopt the Diño and Flores ruling

1. Consummated - Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of one’s personal property
2. Attempted —

IF THERE IS NO TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY, THE CRIME OF THEFT IS NOT COMMITTED  ONLY
CIVIL LIABILITY

PERSONAL PROPERTY INCLUDES PROMISSORY NOTE AND CHECK

THEFT OF CHECKS

1. Payable to cash—
2. Payable to order—
3. Dishonored check – is an impossible crime

PROPERTY MUST BELONG TO ANOTHER  IF NOT, THE CRIME IS ESTAFA

SELLING THE SHARE OF A PARTNER OR JOINT OWNER IS NOT THEFT

EMPLOYEE IS NOT THE OWNER OF SEPARATION PAY WHICH IS NOT ACTUALLY DELIVERED TO HIM

- Even though they are entitled to receive separation pay, it did not automatically vest ownership
of the money in them for lack or proper delivery — signing of the separation papers was a
condition which the employer intended to impose before making delivery  hence, if not done,
it will constitute theft (P vs De Jesus, et al.)

OWNERSHIP NOT TRANSFERRED BEFORE GOODS ARE WEIGHED OR MEASURED

INTENT TO GAIN IS PRESUMED FROM THE UNLAWFUL TAKING

- Exceptions:
o If a person takes personal property from another, believing it to be his own (US vs
Viera)
o One who takes personal property openly and avowedly under claim of title made in
good faith is not guilty of theft, even though the claim of ownership is later found to be
untenable (P vs Lozada)

TAKING IS ENOUGH TO CONSTITUTE THEFT  ACTUAL OR REAL GAIN IS NOT NECESSARY

THERE IS NO THEFT WHEN THE TAKING OF PERSONAL PROPERTY IS WITH THE CONSENT OF ITS
OWNER

- Mere presence or “awareness” is considered as “consent” (US vs Dacanay)

ROBBERY VS THEFT

Robbery Theft
There is violence/intimidation or force —
Taking against the will of the owner Consent of the owner is lacking

IT IS THEFT, AND NOT ROBBERY WHEN VIOLENCE IS FOR A REASON ENTIRELY FOREIGN TO THE FACT
OF TAKING

- Instance: A constabulary officer, suspecting B had concealed and aided a band of robbers, tied B
in his house as a punishment. Several hours later, he took the money with intent to gain from an
open drawer of B (US vs Birueda)

WHEN NO FORCE OR VIOENCE WAS EMPLOYED IN THE TAKING< AS VICTIM WAS ALREADY HEAVILY
WOUNDED  THEFT

FORCE UPON THINGS IN THEFT

- Unless the force upon things is employed to enter a building, the taking of the personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain is theft, and not robbery
o Instance: A entered the house of B through an open door, and once inside he removed
by force, toilet fixtures and carried them away.

FINDER OF LOST PROPERTY (PAR 1 ART 308)

THE TERM “LOST” PROPERTY” EMBRACES LOSS BY STEALING

HOW TO PROVE THIS KIND OF THEFT?

1. Time of the seizure of the taking

2. It was a lost property belonging to another
3. The accused having had the opportunity to return or deliver the lost property to its owner or to
the local authorities, refrained from doing so (P vs Jerusalem)

DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF LOST PROPERTY IS IMMATERIAL, WHEN THE FINDER SURRENDERED IT
VOLUNTARILITY

PAR 1 ART 308 IS NOT LIMITED TO ACTUAL FINDER

- May apply to authorities who did not give the item surrendered to the owner (ex: policeman)

THE LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE KNOWLEDGE OF THE OWNER OF THE LOST PROPERTY

INTENT TO GAIN IS INFERRED FROM DELIBERATE FAILURE TO DELIVER THE LOST PROPERTY TO THE
PROPER PERSON

HUNTING, FISHING, OR GATHERING FRUITS, ETC., IN ENCLOSED ESTATE (PAR 3 ART 308)

ELEMENTS

1. There is an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
2. Offender enters the same
3. Offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
products in the estate or field
4. Hunting or fishing or gathering of products without the consent of the owner

“HIGHGRADING” OR THEFT OF GOLD IS PUNISHED BY PD 581 (1974)

- Any person who shall take gold-bearing ores or rocks without the consent of the operator of the
mining claim

BUYER OF STOLEN GOLD-BEARING ORES OR ROCKS OR GOLD REMOVED THEREFROM SHALL BE GUILTY
OF THEFT AS AN ACCESSORY

- If he has knowledge that it was stolen

THE USE OF TAMPERED WATER OR ELECTRICAL METERS IS PUNISHED UNDER PD 401 (1974)

THEFT OF ELECTRICITY CAN BE EFFECTED WITHOUT ILLEGAL OR UNAUTHORIZED INSTALLATIONS

THEFT IS NOT A CONTINUING OFFENSE

ART. 309. PENALTIES

BASIS OF PENALTIES

1. Value of the thing stolen

2. Value and also the nature of the property taken
3. Circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime

ART 310. QUALIFIED THEFT — +2 DEGREES

ELEMENTS

1. Taking of personal property

2. Property belongs to another
3. Intent to gain
4. Without owner’s consent
5. Accomplished without the use of violence/intimidation nor force
6. Done with grave abuse of confidence

THEFT IS QUALIFIED IF —

1. Committed by a domestic servant

2. Committed with grave abuse of confidence
3. Property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b) mail matter, or (c) large cattle
4. Property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the premises of a plantation
5. Property stolen is a fish taken from a fishpond or fishery
6. Property taken on the occasion of fire,.. other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance

—
 ESTAFA

ART 315. SWINDLING (ESTAFA)

ELEMENTS

1. The accused defrauded another by

a. Abuse of confidence; or
b. Deceit
2. Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary (monetary) estimation is caused to the offended
party or 3rd person

1st ELEMENT — 3 WAYS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA

Estafa is committed —

1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence

2. By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts
3. Through fraudulent means
- Fraud – voidable contracts (valid until annulled); use of machination to induce the other party to
enter into contract

DECEIT IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL REQUISITE OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE

- When the property has been voluntarily entrusted

o Except in the abuse of confidence in misappropriating funds or property

2nd ELEMENT — BASIS OF THE PENALTY

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS

1. Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver something of value

2. That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality
3. Damage or prejudice is caused to another

THERE MUST BE AN EXISTING OBLIGATION TO DELIVER SOMETHING OF VALUE

- The delivery already existed. On making the delivery, the offender has altered the thing he
delivered

BY VIRTUE OF ONEROUS OBLIGATION

- The thing to be delivered must be fully or partially paid when it was received
o If not, the offender will not be liable for estafa

ALTERATIONS

1. Substance i.e., delivering opium instead of molasses

a. Altering the substance may constitute violation of Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
2. Quantity i.e., pledging 20,000 bales of hemp, even though the offender has only 12,000
 3. Quality i.e., delivering poor kind of rice instead of 1 st class
a. When there is no agreement as to the quality of the thing  not guilty of estafa

THERE IS STILL ESTAFA EVEN THOUGH THE OBLIGATION IS IMMORAL OR ILLEGAL

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE (A)

1. Money, goods, or other personal property be received by the offender in trust, commission,
administration, or any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return,
the same (rent or loan?)
a. Check is included in the word “money”
Trust –
Commission – fee paid for services
Administration – the one who collects money?
2. There must be misappropriation or conversion of such money or property or denial on part of
receipt
3. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another
4. There is a demand made by the offended party

PERSONAL PROPERTY (1st ELEMENT) MUST BE RECEIVED BY THE OFFENDER TRASNFERRING JURIDICAL
POSSESSION TO HIM

- Juridical possession – gives the transferee a right over the thing

PD 115 — TRUST RECEIPTS LAW

- Failure of an entrustee to turn over the proceeds of the sale of goods, documents or
instruments covered by a trust receipt to the extent of the amount owing to entruster  estafa

2 OBLIGATION

1. To turn it over (sales)

2. Return

WHEN THE GOODS SUBJECT OF THE TRUST RECEIPT ARE NOT INTENDED FOR SALE 
TRANSACTION IS LOAN  CANNOT BE CHARGED AS ESTAFA

THE PHRASE “OR UNDER ANY OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE DUTY TO MAKE DELIVERY OF, OR TO
RETURN THE SAME,” INCLUDES QUASI-CONTRACTS AND CERTAIN CONTRACTS OF BAILMENT

- Quasi-contract (1157, NCC)

o Solution indebiti – obligation to return money paid by mistake
o Negotiorum gestio – voluntary takes charge of the property of another
- Contracts of bailment
o Contract of deposit
o Contract of lease of personal property
o Commodatum –
Lessee or borrower acquires juridical possession  contracts require the return of the
thing received
CONTRACT OF PURCHASE AND SALE  NOT ESTAFA ONLY CIVIL LIABILITY

- When the transaction fails  not estafa

SAME WITH CASH ADVANCE

AND MUTUUM (LOAN OF MONEY)

- i.e., money market

NO “OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE DUTY TO RETURN THE SAME”  ONLY CIVIL LIABILITY

- i.e., sale of property on trial bases

THERE IS NO ESTAFA WHEN THE MONEY OR PERSONAL PROPERTY IS NOT TO BE USED FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR TO BE RETURNED

- It must be stated clearly that it is received for [example] safekeeping, commission, or

administration

AMOUNTS PAID BY THE STUDENTS TO THE SCHOOL TO ANSWER FOR THE VALUE OF MATERIALS
BROKEN ARE NOT MERE DEPOSITS

- Relationship between them is debtor and creditor  treated as loan not deposit (mutuum?)

THERE IS NO ESTAFA IF THE THING RECEIVED UNDER A CONTRACT OF SALE ON CREDIT

- Credit -

CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR ESTAFA IS NOT AFFECTED BY NOVATION OF CONTRACT

- Novation – consensual replacement of a contract's party or obligation with a new one. The new
party takes on the obligation of the original party, thus completely releasing the former party of
that obligation
o Difference from assignment is it includes rights, needs consent, and terminates the
original contract

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE (B)

1. Misappropriation – to take something for own benefit

2. Conversion – the act of disposing another’s property as if it were one’s own
3. Denial that the thing was received

MOMENTARY USE BY THE AGENT OF FUNDS BELONGING TO HIS PRINCIPAL DOES NOT CONSTITUTE
ESTAFA

- Fraudulent intent is a necessary element of estafa

THERE IS NO ESTAFA WHEN AN AGENT WHO GAVE TO A SUB-AGENT THE THING RECEIVED FROM HIS
PRINCIPAL

- The law on agency allows the appointment in the absence of an express agreement
WIHHOLDING APPLICATION OF MONEY RECEIVED BY AGEN  DECIDED ON ITS OWN PARTICULAR
FACTS — MUST ACT ON GOOD FAITH

RIGHT OF AGENT TO DEDUCT COMMISSION FROM AMOUNTS COLLECTED

- Can an agent with a right to a commission who collected money for the principal be held for
estafa, if he failed to turn over that part of his collection to the latter?  IT DEPENDS
o If the agent is authorized to retain his commission  no estafa
o Otherwise, he is guilty of estafa, because he is not a joint owner

“TO THE PREJUDICE OF ANOTHER” — NOT NECESSARILY THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY

PARTNERSHIP. WHEN THERE IS ESTAFA

- When the money or property had been received by a partner for specific purpose and he later
misappropriated  guilty of estafa

DEMAND NEED NOT BE FORMAL. IT MAY BE VERBAL

DEMAND IS NOT REQUIRED, BUT IS NECESSARY  IT IS A CIRCUMSTANCIAL EVIDENCE

DEMAND IS NOT NECESSARY IN ESTAFA THROUGH MISAPPROPRIATION OR CONVERSION

THERE IS NO ESTAFA THROUGH NEGLIGENCE

- Fraudulent act is necessary; same with intent to gain

THE GRAVITY OF THE CRIME OF ESTAFA IS DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF THE AMOUNT NOT
RETURNED BEFORE THE INSTITUTION OF THE CRIMINAL ACTION

ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE VS THEFT

ESTAFA THEFT
Material or physical possession of the thing
Offender receives the thing Offender takes the thing without consent
The offender must acquire the juridical
possession of the thing

WHEN THE OWNER DOES NOT EXPECT THE IMMEDIATE RETURN OF THE THING HE DELIVERED TO THE
ACCUSED  MISAPPROPRIATION IS ESTAFA

- EXCEPTION: obligation to deliver to a third person  qualified theft

o Applies with servants, domestics, or employees

POSSESSION OF AGENT VS POSSESSION OF TELLER OF BANK

AGENT TELLER OF BANK

Agent can assert as against his own principal Payment to the teller is payment to the bank —
itself
- Teller has no independent right to
possess the same as against the bank
SELLING THE THING RECEIVED TO BE PLEDGED WITH THE INTENT TO APPROPRIATE AT THE TIME IT
WAS RECEIVED  THEFT

ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE VS MALVERSATION

ESTAFA MALVERSATION
(private) (public)
Offenders are entrusted with funds/property Offenders are entrusted with funds/property
Continuing offense Continuing offense
Property is always private Usually public funds/property
Offender is private individual or public officer Offender is usually a public officer accountable
who is not accountable for public funds/property for public funds/property
Crime is committed by misappropriation, Crime is committed by appropriation, taking or
conversion, or denial consenting

IN PROSECUTION FOR MALVERSATION

- The private individual allegedly in conspiracy with the offender may be held liable for estafa

MISAPPROPRIATION OF FIREARMS RECEIVED BY A POLICEMAN  MALVERSATION

ESTAFA BY TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF THE SIGNATURE OF THE OFFENDED PARTY IN BLANK

ELEMENTS

1. The paper with the signature of the offended party be in blank

2. The offended party should have delivered it to the offender
3. That above the signature of the offended party is a document is written by the offender
without authority to do so
4. The document so written creates a liability of, or causes damage to, the offended party or any
3rd person

ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT

ELEMENTS

1. There must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means

2. Must be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud
3. Offended party must have relied on the [act], that is, he was induced to part with his money or
property because of the [act]
4. Offended party suffered damage

THERE IS NO DECEIT IF THE COMPLAINANT WAS AWARE OF THE FICTITIOUS NATURE OF THE
PRETENSE  NO ESTAFA

3 WAYS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA UNDER 315 NO 2 (A)

1. Fictitious name
 2. Falsely pretending to possess:
a. Power
b. Influence
c. Qualifications
d. Property
e. Credit
f. Agency
g. Business or imaginary transactions –
3. Other similar deceits

ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT

**check reviewer**

ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT VS THEFT

- THERE MAY BE THEFT EVEN IF THE ACCUSED HAS POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY — IF HE WAS
ENTRUSTED ONLY WITH THE MATERIAL OR PHYSICAL (DE FACTO) POSSESSION

COMPLEX CRIME — ESTAFA THROUGH FALSIFICATION OF COMMERCIAL (PUBLIC) DOCUMENT

- Estafa + falsification of commercial document (“malversation”)

ESTAFA THROUGH FALSE PRETENSE MADE IN WRITING IS ONLY A SIMPLE CRIME OF ESTAFA

ATTEMPTED ESTAFA THROUGH FORGERY

ESTAFA “BY MEANS OF OTHER DECEITS” (ART 318)

- i.e., deed of donation, vitiated by lack of consent

- estafa by obtaining food or accommodation at a hotel

ESTAFA BY ALTERING THE QUALITY, FINENESS OR WEIGHT OF ANYTHING PERTAINING TO HIS ART OR
BUSINESS. ART 315 NO 2 (B)

- Fraudulent manipulation is punished under the Consumer Act of the Philippines

ESTAFA BY PRETENDING TO HAVE GIVEN BRIBE (ART NO 2 (C))

- If he really bribed  crime is corruption of public officer

BY INDUCING ANOTHER BY MEANS OF DECEIT TO SIGN ANY DOCUMENT (ART 315 NO 3 (A))

ESTAFA BY RESORTING TO SOME FRAUDULENT PRACTICE TO INSURE SUCCESS IN GAMBLING (ART 315
NO 3(B))

ESTAFA BY REMOVING, CONCEALING, OR DESTROYING DOCUMENTS (ART 315 NO 3(C))

DISTINGUISHED FROM INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS

- In infidelity, the offender is a public officer who is officially entrusted with the document

ELEMENTS OF DECEIT AND ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE MAY CO-EXIST

THERE CAN BE A COMPLEX CRIME OF THEFT AND ESTAFA

ART 316 OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING

PAR 1 – BY CONVEYING, SELLING, ENCUMBERING, OR MORTGAGING ANY REAL PROPERTY.

PRETENDING TO BE THE OWNER OF THE SAME

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
*temp*

What is Malicious Mischief?

 It is the willful damaging of another’s property for the sake of causing damage due to hate,
revenge or other evil motive.

What are the crimes classified as Malicious Mischief?

1. Special Cases of Malicious Mischief (Art. 328) – As regards the means employed and the nature
of the damaged properties
2. Other Mischiefs (Art. 329)
 3. Damage and Obstruction to means of communication (Art. 330) - As regards the means
employed and the nature of the damaged properties
4. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings (Art. 331) - As regards the
means employed and the nature of the damaged properties

Who are liable for Malicious Mischief? (Art. 327)

 Any person who shall deliberately cause to the property of another any damage not falling
within the terms of the next preceding chapter.

What are the Elements of Malicious Mischief?

1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of another

o Offender should act under this impulse of a specific desire to inflict injury to another.
o Malicious mischief CANNOT be committed through negligence
2. That such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction
3. That the act of damaging another’s property be committed merely for the sake of damaging it.
o 3rd Element presupposes that the offender acted due to hate, revenge or other evil
motive

Is it Malicious Mischief if the act of damaging to another’s property was inspired by mere pleasure of
destroying?

 Yes.

What is the liability if there is no malice?

 Only Civil Liability.

NOTE: The crime of Malicious Mischief is not determined solely by the mere act of inflicting upon the
property of a third person, but it must be shown that the act had for its object, the injury of the property
merely for the sake of damaging it

What does “Damage” means in malicious mischief?

 It means not only loss but also diminution of what is a man’s own.
 It is THEFT IF after damaging the property, the offender removes or makes use of the fruits or
objects of the damage
 Damaging of property must not result from crime (Reason: Such damages are mere incidents of
the crime and as such may give rise only to civil liability)

May a person charged with malicious mischief be found guilty of damage to property through reckless
imprudence?

 Yes. Since Reckless imprudence is not a crime itself but merely a way of committing it.

SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

What are the Special Cases of Malicious Mischief? (Also called “Qualified Malicious Mischief
(Art. 328)
 1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of public functions
o As distinguished from Sedition: This crime does not have the element of public and
tumultuous uprising.
o Similar in the sense that there is an intent to obstruct the performance of public
function
2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
4. Causing damage to the property of the National Museum or National Library, or to any archive
or registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public.

What are the Penalties of the Special Cases of Malicious Mischief? (Art. 328)

1. Prison Correcional in its minimum and medium periods – Value of the damage caused exceeds
P200,000.
2. Arresto Mayor – Value does not exceed P200,000 but is over P40,000
3. Arresto Menor – Value does not exceed P40,000
(As amended by R.A. No. 10951)

OTHER MISCHIEFS

What are the Other Mischiefs? (Art. 329)

 Those Mischiefs not included in Art. 328

 Example: Killing cowns of another as an act of revenge; Scattering human excrement in public
building (Value cannot be estimated)

What are the penalties for Other Mischiefs? (Art. 329)

1. Arresto Mayor in its medium and maximum periods – Value of the damage caused exceeds
P200,000.
2. Arresto Mayor in its minimum and medium periods – Value does not exceed P200,000 but is
over P40,000
3. Arresto Menor or fine not less than the value of the damage caused and not more than
P40,000– Value does not exceed P40,000 or cannot be estimated
(As amended by C.A. NO. 3999 and R.A. 10951)

DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO MEANS OF COMMUNICATION

How is Damage and Obstruction to means of communication is committed? (Art. 330)

 By damaging any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.

What are the Penalties for Damage and Obstruction to means of communication? (Art. 330)

1. Prision Correcional in its medium and maximum periods – Any person who shall damage any
railway, telegraph or telephone lines
o Object of the offender is merely to cause damage
 2. Prision Mayor – If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision, or other accident,
without prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender for the other consequences of his
criminal act.
o The derailment of cars SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN PURPOSELY SOUGHT for by the
offender. It must have resulted from damage to railway, telegraph or telephone lines.

What constitutes an integral part of a railway system (Art. 330)

 The electric wires

 Traction cables
 Signal system
 Other things pertaining to railways

Is Article 330 applicable when the telegraph or telephone lines do not pertain to railways?

 No. Art. 330 applies to person who cuts telegraph or telephone wires BUT it must pertain to a
railway system

What crime is committed if as a result of the damage caused to railways, certain passengers of the
train are killed?

 It depends.
 If there is no intent to kill – Damages to means of communication with homicide (Art. 4 & 48)
 If there is intent to kills and damaging the railways was the means to accomplish the criminal
purpose – Murder

DESTROYING OR DAMAGING STATUES, PUBLIC MONUMENTS, OR PAINTINGS

What are the Penalties for Destroying or Damaging Statues, Public Monuments, or paintings?
(Art. 331)

1. Arresto Mayor in its medium period to Prision Correcional in its minimum period – To any
person who shall destroy or damage statues or any other useful ornamental public monuments
2. Arresto Menor or a fine not exceeding P40,000, or both such fine and imprisonment, in the
discretion of the court – To any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or ornamental
painting of a public nature.