ART 15 ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES

Pp versus GLODO, G.R. No. 136085, July 7, 2004

The information alleges that Maricel was only 15 years old at the time the crime was committed and

that she is the granddaughter of appellant. However, the prosecution merely presented the oral

testimony and sworn statement of Maricel. It failed to present independent evidence proving the age of

the victim and her relationship with appellant so as to warrant the imposition of death penalty.

Relationship as element of the offense.

a. Parricide- victim is father, mother, child, ascendant, descendant or spouse

b. Adultery- wife

c. Concubinage- husband

In these cases relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating.

Intoxication

a. Mitigating

1. Not habitual or

2. Unintentional/accidental/not subsequent to the plan to commit the felony

b. Aggravating

1. habitual or

2. intentional/subsequent to the plan to commit the felony

Mere proof that offender imbibed intoxicating liquor is not sufficient

Although there is no hard and fast rule on the amount of liquor that the accused imbibed on that

occasion, but the test is that it must have sufficed to affect his mental faculties, to the extent of blurring

his reason and depriving him of self-control

Absent clear and convincing proof as to appellants state of intoxication, we are unable to agree that the

alternative circumstance of intoxication was present to aggravate the offense. (Pp vs Inggo, GR no

140872, June 23, 2003)

Pp vs BERNAL, GR No 132791 & 140465-66, Sept 2, 2002

Thus, in the absence of clear and convincing proof that the intoxication was habitual or intentional on

the part of accused-appellant, it is improper to consider the same as aggravating.

But his intoxication cannot likewise be considered mitigating because accused-appellant failed to show

that his intoxication impaired his will power or his capacity to understand the wrongful nature of his

acts. The person pleading intoxication must prove that he took such quantity of alcoholic beverage, prior

to the commission of the crime, as would blur his reason.

Presumption

When the accused is established to be drunk, the presumption is that it was not habitual but accidental

and therefore, mitigating.

Degree of Instruction or Education

a. mitigating when there is lack of instruction or education. There must also lack of sufficient

intelligence.

Exceptions:

-crimes against property

-crimes against chastity

-murder

b. aggravating when there is high degree of instruction or education when taken advantage of by

the offender

Pp vs MANGSANT, GR No 45704, May 25, 1938

Lack of instruction cannot apply to one who has studied in the first grade in a public school, but only

to him who really has not received any instruction.

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE

The general rule is that an offender is criminally liable for his own actions

When there is only on felon, he alone is criminally liable

In case of multiple offenders, criminal liability depends on the degree and nature of participation in

the criminal act.

ART 16. Who are criminally liable.

Grave and Less Grave Felonies:

Principals;

Accomplices;

Accessories

Light Felonies:

Principals;

Accomplices.

Only natural persons.

a. RPC requires that a person act with malice or with negligence

b. Juridical persons cannot be deprived of liberty

c. Mots penalties can be executed by natural persons.

ART 17. Principals

1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;

2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;

3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would

not have been accomplished

Principal by direct participation

Requisites:

1. That they participate in the criminal resolution;

2. They carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly

tended to the same end.

Conspiracy

Participating in the criminal resolution is conspiracy.

Two or more persons come to an agreement and decide to commit it.

Conspiracy not as a felony but a manner of incurring criminal liability.

Pp VS REYES, GR No 178300, Mar 17, 2009

Conspiracy presupposes unity of purpose and unity in the execution of the unlawful objective among the

accused. When the accused by their acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and the

other performing another part as to complete the crime, with a view to the attainment of the same

object, conspiracy exists.

Conspiracy may be expressed or implied

Stated otherwise, it is not essential that there be proof of the previous agreement and decision to

commit the crime; it is sufficient that the malefactors acted in concert pursuant to the same objective.

(Pp vs Amodia, GR no. 173791, Apr 7, 2009)

Manner of commission of crime

Conspiracy may be deduced form the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated or

inferred from the acts of the accused which show a joint or common purpose and design, a concerted

action and a community of interest among the accused. (Pp vs SICAD, GR no 133833, Oct 15, 2002)

“Acting as lookouts”

One who participates in the material execution of the crime by standing guard or lending moral support

to the actual perpetrators thereof is criminally responsible to the same extent as the latter. In a

conspiracy, it is not necessary to show that all the conspirators actually hit and killed the victim. (SICAD)

Indicators of conspiracy

a. Spontaneous agreement

b. Active cooperation by all the offenders in the perpetration of the crime

c. Contributing positive acts to the realization of a common criminal intent

d. Presence during the commission of the crime by a band and lending moral support thereto

e. Knowing the plan and accepting the role assigned and actually performing that role

Where there is no conspiracy

Mere silence does not make one a conspirator. (Pp vs GENSOLA, Sept 30, 1969, GR no L-24491)

Mere companionship is not conspiracy. (Pp vs PADRONES, 1990 Sept 13, 1990, GR No 85823)

When there is no conspiracy, each is liable for his own acts.

Pp vs ENRIQUEZ, Oct 10, 1933, GR no 37408

“if a number of persons agree to commit, and enter upon the commission of a crime which will probably

endanger human life such as robbery, all of them are responsible for the death of a person that ensues

as a consequence.”

Not the object of the conspiracy/necessary or logical consequence of the crime intended

In Umali (96 Phil 185) robbery is not included/necessary or logical consequence of sedition;

Where the conspiracy specifically targeted one and only one person, the killing of others would not

affect the conspirators. (de la cerna, Oct 30, 1967)

Some rules in conspiracy

Conspiracy alone does not result in criminal liability (Timbol)

Participation in the criminal resolution must either be before or simultaneous with the criminal act.

Applicable only in crimes committed by means of dolo.

2nd Requisite. They carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which

directly tended to the same end.

He must be at the scene of the crime personally taking part in its execution.

It is sufficient that the act performed directly tends to accomplish the intended crime.

Ex: holding down the victim in murder or rape; acting as lookout/guard.

Principal by Inducement. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it.

1. Directly forcing another to commit a crime;

-using irresistible force; or

-causing uncontrollable fear

2. Directly inducing another to commit a crime.

-giving price or offering reward or promise;

-using words of command.

Requisites of principal by induction

1. Inducement with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime

2. Inducement is the determining cause of the commission of the crime

1st requisite. Intention

Clear intention to procure the commission of the crime

In Otadora the promise of pecuniary gain (money and carabaos) and supplying the gun to use in the

commission of the crime

In Alcontin, the promise of living together once the husband of the Incuder is killed.

Does not include

Thoughtless expressions;

Imprudent advice:

2nd requisite. Determining cause

Must be of such a nature that without it the crime would not have been committed.

It must:

1. Precede the act induced; and

2. Influential

Requisites: Words of Command

1. Intention to procure commission of crime

2. Inducer must have ascendancy or influence

3. Words must be direct, so efficacious, so powerful as to amount to physical coercion

4. Uttered prior to the commission of the crime

5. Material executor has no personal reason to commit the crime

Principal by Cooperation. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act

without which it would not have been accomplished

Requisites:

1. Participation in criminal resolution

2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act, w/o a/c it would not

have been accomplished

Cooperation

Cooperation- implies that there is a desire or wish in common.

Another act- the act must be different from the acts of the principal by direct participation the act must

not involve the material execution of the offense.

Ex dragging a girl to place where she is to be raped; certifying a check to facilitate estafa.

Three types of Principals

Even in case of conspiracy, to be liable as a principal one must fall under any of the three concepts in Art

17.

In such case, we apply our ruling in Pp vs Ubina where we held that when a accused does not fall under

any of the three concepts defined in Art 17 of the RPC, he may only be considered guilty as an

accomplice (Pp vs CARRIAGA, GR no 135029, Sept 12, 2003)

ART 18. Accomplices

1. Cooperates by previous or simultaneous acts

2. Not a principal

3. No conspiracy

Conspirator vs Accomplice

Conspirators and accomplices know and agree in the criminal design.

Conspirators participate in the criminal resolution, accomplices concur in the criminal design.

Requisites:

1. Community of design

2. Cooperation by previous or simultaneous acts

3. Relation between acts of principal and accomplice

1st requisite. Community of Design

Community of design requires knowledge and concurrence of the criminal design

Prior to the commission of the act.

Knowledge of a crime different from that actually committed as long as it is a natural consequence of

the crime intended, an accomplice is liable.

2nd requisite: cooperation by previous or simultaneous acts.

The acts of the accomplice must not be indispensable o/w he is a principal.

The acts must not be due to conspiracy

3rd requisite:

The act of the accomplice must have a relation with the act of the principal

Liable for different crimes

A attacks B with treachery. Later C and D arrives and take part in killing B.

A- Principal in murder

C and D- Accomplice in Homicide

*no conspiracy, no knowledge as to the manner A attacked B.

ART 19. Accessories.

Knowledge in the commission of the crime, not being principals or accomplices, take subsequent part in

its commission by:

1. Profiting or assisting the accused to profit;

2. Concealing or destroying the body of the crime or its effects/instruments to prevent its

discovery

3. Harbouring, concealing or assisting in the escape

Harbouring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal.

1. Public officer who abuses his public function (any crime)

2. Private person (treason, parricide, murder, attempt against the life of the president, habitually

guilty of some other crime)

Accessories

To convict and accused as an accessory, the following elements must be proven: 1. Knowledge of the

commission of the crime and 2. Subsequent participation in it by any of the three above-cited modes (Pp

vs WILFREDO TOLENTINO, GR no. 139179, Apr 3, 2002)

PENALTIES

ART 22 Retroactive effect of Penal Laws

The general rule is that penal laws have prospective effect

They can only be given retroactive effect if:

1. It is favourable to the accused

2. The accused is not a habitual criminal

Prospective effect of penal laws.

Applicable to all penal laws

This rule is applicable even for those serving sentence by final judgement.

Habitual criminal is one who…

A person shall be deemed a habitual delinquent if within a period of ten years from the date of his

release or last conviction of the crims of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or

falsification, he is found guilty of any said crimes a third time or oftener.

Jurisdiction of Courts

It is the law at the time of the institution of the action that determines the jurisdiction of courts

Jurisdiction of the courts is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information.

ART 23 Pardon by the offended party.

Pardon by the offended party does not affect the criminal action. Civil liability may be expressly waived

by the offended party.

The exception under Art 344 of the RPC must be made before the institution of the criminal action.

ART 25 Penalties which may be imposed

Art 25 is a classification of penalties as to principal or accessory penalties

This is also a list of penalties that may be imposed in the RPC.

*RA 9346 prohibits the imposition of the death penalty. The penalty of reclusion perpetua should be

imposed in lieu of death.

Disqualification and Suspension

Disqualification (whether perpetual/temporary or absolute/special) and suspension may either be

principal or accessory penalties.

Temporary disqualification if principal – 6y and 1 d – 12 yrs. If accessory it shall have the duration of the

principal penalty.

ART 26 Fine – when afflictive, correctional or light penalty

Afflictive – exceeds 6,000

Correctional – does not exceed 6,000 but is not less than 200

Light – less than 200

*this classification should not be confused with Art 9, which classifies felonies.

ART 27. Duration of penalties

The amendment giving a duration to reclusion perpetua (20y and 1 d to 40 y) did not mean that it has

reclassified as a divisible penalty. It remains an indivisible penalty (Pp vs LUCAS, GR no 108172-73, Jan 9,

1995)

In what cases in destierro imposed?

1) Serious physical injuries or death under exceptional circumstance (art. 247)

2) In case of failure to give bond for good behaviour.

3) As a penalty for the concubine in the concubinage

4) In cases where after reducing the penalty by onr or more degrees, destierro is the proper

penalty.

ART 28 Computation of penalties

1) When the offender is in prison – the duration of temporary penalties is from the day on which

the judgment of conviction is final.

2) When the offender is not in prison – the duration of the penalty consisting in deprivation of

liberty, is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of judicial authorities for the

enforcement of the penalty

3) The duration of other penalties is from the day on which the offender commences to serve his

sentence.

Ex. of temporary penalties: temp. absolute disqual., temp. special disqual., suspension

Rules in cases of temporary penalties:

If offender is under detention, i.e., undergoing preventive imprisonment, Rule 1 applies. If not, i.e.,

released on bail, Rule 3 applies.

Penalties consisting of deprivation of liberty:

Imprisonment, destierro.

Rules in penalties consisting of deprivation of liberty:

If the offender is not in prison, Rule 2 applies, If undergoing preventive imprisonment, Rule 3 applies.

But the offender is entitled to a deduction of full time or four-fifths (4/5) of the time of his detention.

ART 29 Preventive detention

Offenders who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their

sentence with the full time during which they have undergone preventive imprisonment, if the

detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon

convicted prisoners. If he does not agree, he shall be credited with four-fifths of the time during which

he has undergone preventive imprisonment.

Exceptions:

Recidivists and those convicted previously 2 or 3 times of any crime, and

Those who fail to surrender voluntarily when summoned for execution of sentence.

Rules:

If the detention prisoner does not abide by the rules imposed on convicts, he will be credited in the

service of his sentence with 4/5 of the period of preventive detention

If the detention prisoner has been in detention for a period equal to or more than the possible

maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not

terminated, he shall be released immediately.

In case, the possible penalty is destierro, he shall be released after 30 days of preventive imprisonment.

There is preventive imprisonment when the case is nonbailable or eve if bailable, he cannot furnish the

required bail.

ART 34

Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental

authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the

right to manager his property, and of the right to dispose of such property by any act or any

conveyances inter vivos

ART 36 Pardon

Pardon remits the principal penalty but not the accessory penalty, unless the pardon expressly provides

otherwise.

Exception: when pardon is granted after the principal penalty has been fully executed

ART 38 Pecuniary liabilities- order of payment

1. Reparation of damage caused

2. Indemnification of consequential dmages

3. Fine

4. Cost of proceedings

*this article is applicable only when the property of the convict is not sufficient to pay all pecuniary

liabilities.

ART 39 Subsidiary penalty

Under the PRC, subsidiary imprisonment is additional penalty consisting of imprisonment for a convict

who has no property to pay the fine at a rate of one day for each 8 pesos.

Rules under the RPC

if prison correccional or arresto and fine – s.i shall not exceed 1/3 of the term of sentence and in no case

exceed 1 year.

If penalty is only a fine – s.i. shall not exceed 6 months if prosecuted for grave or less grave; and not

exceed 15 days if for a light felony.

If penalty imposed is higher than prison correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment.

Rules in special laws

If court imposed a fine – shall not exceed 6 months (one day for every P2.5)

If both imprisonment and fine – shall not exceed 1/3 term of imprisonment and no case exceed 1 year.

In case imprisonment for more than 6 years and fine – no s.i.

ART 45 Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and instruments and tools in the

commission of the crime

“Ever penalty” presupposes that this is an accessory penalty

The confiscation or forfeiture is in favour of the government

If a third person owns the property and is not liable for the offense, the property cannot be confiscated

or forfeited in favour of the govt

If the property is not subject of lawful commerce, it shall be destroyed regardless of whether it belongs

to the accused or a third person.

Rules

There must be a criminal case o/w no penalty can be imposed

If the property belongs to a person not included in the charge, the court cannot order the

confiscation/forfeiture of the property

If the property was not submitted to the court in evidence, said property cannot be confiscated

(PDEA vs BRODETT, GR no 196390, Sept 28, 2011)

To bar the forfeiture of the tools and instruments belonging to a third person, therefore, there must be

an indictment charging such third person either as a principal, accessory, or accomplice.

Release of property

Property seized (not illegal per se) must be returned to the person from whom it was taken or to person

who is entitled to its possession if:

a. No criminal prosecution;

b. Unreasonable delay in prosecution

*upon the termination of case

ART 46. Penalties to be imposed on principals in general

The penalties provided for in the RPC are the penalties imposed on principals for the consummated

felony.

There are, however, certain provisions where a penalty is provided for a frustrated stage or attempted

stage of a felony.

ART 47 When death penalty imposed

Must be imposed in all cases under existing laws:

Except:

-below 18 yrs of age;

-more than 70 yrs of age;

-required majority in SC is not obtained

Pp vs MATEO, July 7, 2004, GR no 147678.

“if only to ensure utmost circumspection before the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua or life

imprisonment is imposed, the Court now deems it wise and compelling to provide in these cases a

review by the Court of Appeals before the case is elevated to the Supreme Court.”

ART 48 Complex Crimes

In complex crimes at least two crimes are committed but they constitute only one crime, as only one

penalty is imposed upon the offender. This is intended to benefit the offender who is, in the eyes of the

law, less criminally perverse than on who commits two or more separate and independent crimes.

Two kinds of complex crimes:

Compound crime – a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies.

Ex: throwing a hand grenade at a group of people causing death or injuries to several in the group.

Complex crime proper – one offense is a necessary means for committing the other.

Ex: falsifying cedulas so as to collect fees from persons to whom they are issued.

Compound Crime

Requisites:

1. One single act

2. The single act produces two or more grave or less grave felonies

One single act

Throwing a hand grenade into a group of people is a single act

Placing a bomb in an airplane is a single act

Firing a gun once is a single act

Two or more grave or less grave felonies.

In case the single act produces light felonies they are either treated as:

-separate offenses; or

-absorbed. The rule that light felonies are absorbed should only be applied when there is only one

victim.

Pp vs DE LOS SANTOS, GR no 131588, March 27, 2011

The slight physical injuries caused by GLENN to the ten other victims through reckless imprudence,

would, had they been intentional, have constituted light felonies. Being light felonies, which are not

covered by Art 48, they should be treated and punished as separate offenses. Separate information

should have, therefore, been filed.

Several offenders and several victims

Where there are several offenders and it cannot be ascertained who among them killed the several

deceased, there is only one crime committed. This ruling should only be applied when it cannot be

ascertained who among the offenders killed the victims (Sanidad, April 30, 2003; Lawas, June 30, 1955;

Abellla, Aug 31, 1979)

Complex crime proper.

Requisites:

1. At least two offenses;

2. One or some must be necessary means to commit the other;

3. Both offenses must be punished under the same statute.

At least two offenses

Falsification as means to commit malversation (Barbas

Usurpation of official functions as a means to commit simple seduction

Necessary means

Necessary does not mean indispensable o/w the offense would be considered as an element of the

offense and the result would be one felony committed.

The other crime must be a means to commit not to conceal. If the other crime is used to conceal the

other, they are separate offenses.

Applicability of Art.48

Art 48 is applicable only when the RPC does not provide a specific penalty for a Special Complex Crime,

ex: Kidnapping w Murder or Homicide, Robbery w Homicide, Rape w Homicide