Pre-seek lecture in Criminal Law 1By: Justice CornejoClassical- good points in case of heinous crimesEclectic combination of classical (penalty) and positivist (social crimes)Positivist theoryUtilitarian/Protective theory- to protect society, not only wrongdoers but also the potential (those who show an overt or propensity to commit crime)Characteristics of crim law1. Generality- ph law applies to all those who live and sojourn within PH territory. Except: sovereigns, ambassadors, head of states (consuls and vice consuls are not exempt from the general application of criminal law)- 2. Territoriality- physical boundaries (air, land and sea- 12 mile limit reckon from the low watermark).- as long as the crime is committed within ph territory- subject to ph crim law and ph courts. Except (MEMORIZE)a. Those who commit crime on board of Philippine ship or airshipb. Counterfeit currency, notes issued by ph govt c. Guilty of introduction of those counterfeited currency and notes issued by govt d. Public officers/employees pursuantFrench rule and English Rule- in relation to the crimes committed while on board of foreign merchant vessel. French Rule- court of the country of the foreign merchant vessel, except when it affects public order or securityEnglish Rule- PH court has jurisdiction except in case of internal management.If crimes committed on board a warship- court of the country to which the warship belongs. Said warship is an extension of the foreign country.Commit a crime on ph ship or airship- not a question of ownership but registration. If its a foreign-owned ship but registered in ph, PH court has jurisdictionProspectivity- law made to move forward, not backward. Apply to act/transactions/circumstances that take place after the enactment/promulgation of the penal laws. Exception: if it is favourable to the accused. It is not enough that the penal law is favourable to the accused, the latter must not be a habitual delinquent (art 62).Habitual delinquency- is one of aggravating circumstance- found guilty of any of serious pi, less pi, robbery, theft, estafa, falsification for the third time or oftener (reckoning point- date of last release or date of last conviction- 10 years therefrom)Art. 3- felony- an act/omission punishable by law- provides for the definition of felony- committed either by dolo (intentional) or culpa (negligence).Art. 4- ways by which a person incurs criminal liabilityDifference bet intent and motivecrim intent is presumed from the commission of an unlawful act. Cannot be presumed if it is a lawful act. Exception: when intent is an element of the crime. Example: intent necessary in the crime of theft or robbery- intent to gain. Physical injuries- mere inflict of injury.Mistake of fact is an absolutory cause. MEMORIZE elements of mistake of fact.1. It could have been lawful as the facts been as the accused believed them to be. 2. Aberratio ictus3. Praetor intentionem

Was the act felonious- 1st is to determine whether the act/omission is punishable by law.

No crim liability, only civil in case-Act of jumping to commit suicide- not felonious, no law punishes the commission of suicide. Rule: if the act is not felonious, any incidental acts thereafter is not also felonious.

Proximate cause- from cause to effect, nothing must have happened in between. Determine first if the act is one of criminal act- cause. (it must be unbroken,..)

Impossible crime- act would be an offense (not yet an offense) against person or prop where if not due to inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of inadequate or ineffectual means not yet an offense but considered a crime because it punishes the criminal propensity.Case: a check pay to cash was stolen (with intent to gain), but it turned out that it was a bounced check. it is an impossible crime because it would have been theft (with intent to gain) but did not succeed because the check is inherently not funded)Poison mistakenly using sugar- impossible crime due to use of ineffectual meansStages of crime:(REMINDERS: IN BOOK 2, KNOW THE ELEMENTS OF EACH CRIME, NOT NECESSARILY PENALTIES)ConsummatedFrustrated- intended crime not consummated due to causes beyond the control of the perpetrator (example: if all acts are executed to kill someone but did not die due to medical intervention); (if did not die due to an aid extended by the perpetrator himself, not frustrated)AttemptedOvert actMere intent- not punishable (ex. Buying a rat killer to be used for the intended poisoning of intended victim)- mere preparatory act, not an overt act. Not attempted stage. But if it was already positioned ready to poison the victim, but instead the latter, a cat got it which died thereafter- attempted stage due to an overt ageNO! NO! IN CRIMINAL STAGES: No frustrated rape, (CHECK RECORDING NO. 44 50Bribery is consummated always (public officer/employee). Mere acceptance, though not owned (subsequently returned)- consummated but Giver is liable for Attempted corruption (giver) if not accepted.Conspiracy is penalized only if expressly made a crime and given a penalty. if not treated as crime, mere mode to commit a crime- Conspiracy must be clearly and convincingly as the crime committed act of one, act of allEven if conspiracy did not succeed, if they commit conspiracy as defined as crime: conspiracy to commit rebellion, sedition, treason, espionage, proposal to commit rebellion, coup dtat If its a conspiracy to commit murder, if not committed, not liable (because not expressly made a crime as conspiracy)VAWC- may conspiracy be applied to violation of RA 9262 (sec. 3 : offender must be somebody who is related or connected to the victim- marriage, former marriage, sexual or dating relationship). Victim charging VAWC the husband and in-laws. SC ruled that even if the relationship is expressed in the law, the same provision does not preclude the application of the principle of conspiracy under the revised penal code. This calls for suppletory application of RPC in the special penal laws. Hence, In-laws who conspired with the offender in committing the violence against the victim- liable under conspiracy as punished by the revised penal code.Justifying, exempting, mitigating, aggravating- modifying circumstances- changes the crimeJustifying- no crime, no criminal liability; no civil liability since there is no crime (except para 4- avoidance of greater injury or state of necessity- civil liability will be borne by the one benefited);Exempting- there is a crime but the criminal is exempt from crim liability; since there is a crime, there is civil liability (except Para 4- accident & 7-insuperable cause- no civil and crim liability in these 2 cases); Different kinds of aggravating: Generic, specific- apply to specific crime, qualifying- changes nature of crime, inherent- must accompany commission of crime and special- quasi-recidivismJustifying, exempting and mitigating- availed by the offenderAggravating- prosecution avails of thisJustifying:Indispensable requisite: unlawful aggression from the victim (common to all instances of defense: self defense, defense of relative and defense of stranger)Unlawful aggression must be existing when the defense was made.Retaliation is never a self defense.Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repelLack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending in defense of relative (this is not a requirement- the victim may have shown provocation, as long as the person defending does not take part thereto)Defense of relative- spouse referred to is legal spouse. If paramour, defense of strangerDefense of stranger- it must be established that there is no retaliation or ill feelings on the part of the person defendingState of necessity/avoidance of greater injury- exception in the rule that in justifying, no crime, no civil liability. Obedience to an order- not blind obedience, it must be obedience to a lawful order. For it to be justified is compliance to a lawful order. But if one is asked to comply with an unlawful order, refusal to comply the unlawful order, but abide due to irresistible force, intimidation- acting in compliance with this unlawful order due to the uncontrollable circumstances, not justified but EXEMPTED.Exempting circumstances:Imbecility/insanity- imbecility crime committed in the state of insanity- total deprivation of will power/ intelligence, exempted. If the crime committed during lucid interval (aware what is happening), liable for the crime committed). Prosecution must prove the state of lucid interval, not the defense.2-7 years old- child not under the state of responsibilityState of epilepsy- covered by insanity as an exempting circumstanceSenility-not insanity, not exempting circumstance. Maybe mitigatingMinority- RA 9344Accident- in relation to Art. 365 example: no intention to bump another vehicle alleging accident; but maybe prosecuted under art. 365 (driving a vehicle, if performing a lawful act but not with due care: liable for culpable felony; performing lawful act with due care- exempt).- without due care- apply 365

Performing a criminal act under compulsion of irresistible force and impulse of uncontrollable fear- if without choice but to do it- exempt (qualify: if the offender has a choice to do or not).Para 7- no crim and civil liab- insuperable force- cause that cannot be overcomeAbsolutory cause- basically exempting circumstances (only they were defined outside Art. 12)1. Instigation2. Mistake of fact3. Total repeal of penal law.As distinguished from extenuating circumstances- mitigating circumstance but outside of art. 13.- example: abortion to conceal dishonor; (check recording no. 44 1:33)Privilege mitigating circumstance- reduces the penalty by 1 degreeMinority; incomplete justifying- majority of the elements must be present except in defense, there is specific requirement (in case of defense- unlawful aggression must always be present in the 2 elements present, if 2 out of 3 no unlawful aggression- not privilege mitigating), incomplete exempting- PMCOne penalty is one degreeOne period is equal to 3 division of a degree (check recording # 45 2:57)2 mitigating, no aggravating- privilege mitigating (1 degree lower)Extenuating circumstance- mitigating but outside the enumeration of Art. 13Absolutory- exempting but outside the enumeration of exempting circumstancefrom the provocation to the reaction- there must be no interval of timeimmediate vindication of grave offense to the one committing the felony- allows interval of time vindication is like retaliation (it sinks before one reacts). If both MCs arise from 1 and the same incidents, allow only 1 mitigating circumstance, reduce the period to its minimum.Passion or obfuscation for it to be mitigating, it must not have arisen from unlawful sentiments. Must be lawful. Obfuscation- confussion. Voluntary surrender- to be mitigating:1. it must be a surrender of ones person, not the instrument used in the commission of the crime. 2. It must be surrender prior to the issuance of warrant of arrest.3. Must be spontaneousConfession of guilt in open court- plea of guilty- to be mitigating1. Must be conditional2. Made before prosecution presents evidence If offer to plead guilty for a lesser offense, to be valid and effective, it must be with the consent of the prosecutor- no more considered as mitigating in the offense pleaded as guilty. To be mitigating, it must be a plea to the offense originally charged in the information.

Analogous circumstances- law recognizes analogous mitigating circumstances of a similar nature to those mentioned in the article. Ex. Extreme poverty- analogous to extreme necessity ; voluntary return of amount disbursed- analogous to voluntary surrender. The law allows analogous mitigating circumstances, it does not provide circumstances analogous to aggravating circumstances.Aggravating Circumstances:Act is committed in the palace of the chief executive or in his presence- interpretations:1. if the act is committed inside the palace even without the presence of the chief executive;2. if committed outside the palace but in the presence of the chief executiveIf committed within malacanang grounds (building other than the palace)- not aggravating, inside palace refers to the structure, the official residence of the President.Night time, uninhabited place or band- aggravating when they are resorted to to facilitate the commission of the crime.Crime committed by a band, with the aid of armedmen- band if it is committed by at least 4 armed malefactors- all must be armed.By a band- crime is participated by all and all members of the band must be armed. Aggravating circumstance is taken against each one of them.Crime committed with the aid of armed men- the material perpetrator relied on the aid of armed man, the aggravating circumstance of aid of armed man applies only to the principal perpetrator. The armed man who extended aid is considered an accomplice. Aggravating circumstance will not be appreciated against the armed man, only as against the material perpetrator.Dwelling- aggravating circumstance if committed in the dwelling of the offended party if the offended party has not given provocation. Even if the crime was committed inside the dwelling of the offended party, but there is a provocation by the offended party, dwelling is not considered an aggravating.4 forms of repetition:1. recidivism- previously convicted by final judgment of another crime under same title of the present crime committed (both are under same title); it is not enough that at the time he is being prosecuted with the present case, he was convicted of another crime, it must be one of final judgment2. quasi-recidivism- after having been convicted by final judgment or before serving sentence or during service of sentence, he commits a new crime (not required to be under the same title)- imposed penalty for the new crime but imposed at the maximum3. reiteration/habituality-offender has been previously punished (convicted) for an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty than the crime presently convicted. Ex. Previously convicted for homicide and now presently convicted of homicide- there is habituality.4. habitual delinquency- art 62- w/in 10 years from last date of conviction or last date of release convicted of si physical injury, less serious pi, estafa, robbery, theft and falsification.Check recording 51 (missed transcription)

Recording # 46Principal by inducement- liable when the crime is committed by the perpetrator due to impulse of uncontrollable fear imposed upon himPrincipal by indispensable cooperation- w/o his cooperation, crime would not have been accomplished.Accomplice likewise gives cooperation but the crime can still be committed even without him. In case of doubt, doubt should be resolved in favour of the accused.Accessory- takes part subsequent to the commission of the crimeIf the principal is at large or acquitted because he is exempt from criminal liability, an accessory can be prosecuted as long it can be established that they take part subsequent to the commission of the crime. If principal is acquitted (ex. Exempt from criminal liability), accessory can still be prosecuted for as long as the crime has been established.MEMORIZE accessories exempt from criminal liability.1. Accessory profits from the crimeIf one take part subsequent to the commission of robbery or theft, essentially you are an accessory. But under PD 1612- anti fencing law, he will be charged as a principal (separate law punishes the accessory as principal)Other than robbery and theft, if one take part subsequent to the commission , accessory (penalty: 2 degrees lower).Difference between reclusion perpetua and life imprisonmentRP- penalty under RPC; remains as indivisible penalty (40 years max is consistent only to the service of sentence, not necessarily making it as divisible penalty); it has accessory penalties (accessory penalty deemed imposed in the judgment, not necessarily be expressed). Under RPC, death has accessory penalty (only if death is not executed)LI- penalty under special law; indefinite; no accessory penaltiesSubsidiary penalty is a principal penalty and must be expressly imposed in the judgment- if cannot pay the fine, one cannot be forced to submit for imprisonment (exception: in case of insolvency)COMPLEX CRIMEArt. 48- compound crime and complex crime properCompound- 1 act (single act) producing 2 or more grave or less grave felonies.If 1 act produces 2 or more grave or less grave felonies and light felony, information must be separate for the light felony (Jason Ayvler- in case of criminal negligence, Art 48 not applicable).People vs Lawas- single act of pulling the trigger which killed several persons (machine gun), it produces several grave or less grave felonies. People vs Tabacco- same case above, SC ruled that in Tabacco, there is only 1 single act, every bullet that killed a person constitute a single homicide. Lawas case is just an exception because it cannot be traced from whom the bullets came, hence, treated as one single crime (in Tobacco, specifically identified)Continuing crime- 1 crime consisting of series of acts but all arising from 1 criminal resolution and the series of acts were committed in 1 place and at the same time (example: theft of roosters stolen at same time- 1 act only)Complex crime- actually commits 2 crimes; 1 act is necessary means to commit the other crime. Necessary, not indispensable. Ex. Forcible abduction with rape; or estafa thru falsification of public document failure to prove 1 component of the crime does not necessarily follow with the other crime. Conviction on the other crime is possible.Effects of the attendance of mitigating circumstances in the imposition of penaltyArt 64- application of penalties divisible penalties- consider the attendance of modifying circumstancesDivisible penalties- has 3 periods: max, med and min1 mitigating 0 aggravating- apply penalty at its minimum1 aggravating 0 mitigating- max0 mitigating 0 aggravating- med

If indivisible:- Art. 63- In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, Privilege mitigating, lower Ordinary mitigating- does not affect the penaltyIn case of indivisible penalty:1 mitigating 0 aggravating- impose the lesser penalty1 aggravating 0 mitigating- impose greater0 mitigating 0 aggravating- impose lesser

If offense if penalized under special laws, no scale of penalties. If offense is penalized under RPC, there is scale of penalties.Art. 70- successive service of penalty rule-

When culprit (convict) is to serve 2 or more penalties, he shall serve him simultaneously only if the nature of penalties will permit him to do so. If nature of penalties will not allow simultaneous service, he has to serve them successively.If both penalties are imprisonment, cannot be served simultaneously. This applies only when the penalty differs such as imprisonment and payment of fine.3-fold service of sentence rule- max of service must not be more than 3 x the most severe penalty, maximum must not exceed 40 years. (applies when the total of all penalties exceed the 3x most severe penalty but not to exceed 40 years).Requisites for the application of the 3-fold rule:1. Convict serve at least 4 penalties2. Total of penalties exceed the most severe 1 penalty- 1 degreeExample: penalty prescribed is PM; 1 degree lower is PCIf penalty prescribed is PM- med to max. , penalty next lower in degree is PCmax to PMmin.1 degree, 1 degree down1 period, 1 period down1 period with 2 degrees, 2 degrees downINDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW- to redeem valuable human material consists of 2 penalties (min and max) service of min is ISL, one is eligible for parole (giving one chance to rehabilitate).MEMORIZE THOSE DISQUALIFIED TO AVAIL ISLISL- applies to both offenses under SPL and felonies under RPC but application differsMin and max- under ISL are not considered as periods but penaltiesUnder SPL- get the minimum which should not be lower than the min provided by the law and max should not be higher than that provided by spl, do not consider attendance of modifying circumstance. Exception: when special law uses the nomenclature of RPC in setting the penalties. Ex: use reclusion perpetua, prision mayor, etc. in this case, modifying circumstances can be considered.SPL provides for its own penalties. Ex. 2 years to 10 years- determine Indeterminate penalty: Indeterminate penalty 2 years as minimum to 8 years as maximum (any min not lower than that prescribed min and max not higher than the max provided as its max)ISL in RPCIndeterminate penalties consist of 2 penalties, the min and max. Consider the penalty prescribed by the code. Min is anywhere within the range of penalty next lower in degree as prescribed by the code. Ex. Penalty prescribed is RTemporal- minimum is PMayor- 6yrs & 1day to 12 years (minimum penalty)Next step is determine the maximum. Here, apply the modifying circumstance:1M 0A- min- RT minimum as maximum1A 0M- max RT max as maximum0M 0A-med RT med as maximumIn case there is Privilege mitigating- lower by 1 degree (example: penalty prescribed is RTemporal- bring it down by 1 degree not by reason of ISL but due to presence of PM- PMayor (indeterminate sentence will apply frm here, not from RTemporal)- ISL is PCor as min and PM as maximumExtinguishment of criminal liability:1. Death of convict (not the offended party- mere witness in crim case). Civil liab is extinguished (check recording #47 1:01)Pardon- relieves the offender consequences of his actsAmnesty- given by virtue of presidential proclamation with concurrence of congress, hence, no need to prove as the court will take judicial notice thereofPardon- it has to be provenPrescription of crime loss or forfeiture of the state to prosecute the offender (from date of discovery or commission of crime)- terminated upon filing of the complaint with the prosecutors office, even for purposes of preliminary investigation, irrespective of nature of offense charged, unless otherwise by special law (which provides its own period of prescription).Prescription of penalty- loss or forfeiture of the state to impose the penalty (prescription does not run when the convict runs out of the country)Partial extinctionCommutation-reduction of penalty Good conduct allowancesExecute penalty only upon final judgment Civil liab that will be extinguished- only those that arises from the crime