Criminal Law I Notes By Judge Oscar Pimentel.docx

Criminal Law I Notes By Judge Oscar Pimentel{source: http://elmerrandom.blogspot.com/2008/06/criminal-law-i-notes-by-judge-oscar.html) CRIMINAL LAW If you look at the book of Gregorio and the book of Reyes, the two books have a different definition of criminal law. In the book of Gregorio, it says that criminal law is a branch of municipal law. I do not know if you have seen that in the book of Gregorio. But in the book of Reyes, it is a branch of public law. Is there a difference? It used to be, in the old times, that when you speak of municipal law, it has an application…local application. Then, naturally, we became a Republic, etc., we became an archipelago composed of several islands so…they actually did not change the definition, they only corrected it. So, it became a branch of public law that defines crimes, treats of their nature and provide for their punishment. CRIME: FELONY v. OFFENSE Look, the word ―crime‖ is (shall we call it) very very important because a crime is not (shall we call it) only that which is punishable under the Revised Penal Code but it includes also those that are punishable under special laws. That is why we have a ―felony‖. A felony is one that is defined and punished for an act or omission that is punishable under the RPC. On the other hand, an ―offense‖ is an act or omission that is defined and punished under special laws or special penal laws. But then, there could be a mixture of (shall we call it) a felony and an offense. A single act may constitute a felony and at the same time an offense. Do you know of any (shall we call it) act or omission that is both a felony and at the same time an offense? ---silence— Let us see… Supposing a girl has a boyfriend (tuksuhan na…) eh, yang mga boys kasi eh, if a girl has a boyfriend eh medyo nag-iisip kaagad ng hindi maganda. Ok, a girl has a boyfriend. She knows that her boyfriend is a snatcher. Alam niya, but you know love knows no boundary. Love is blind and the lovers refuse to see. Okay…one afternoon this man went to see his girlfriend and said, ―Darling, here is a new cellphone‖. So, the girl said, ―Talaga bang bago yan?‖ ―Oh, yes, eh kabibili lang nung lalaki sa tindahan yan nung makuha ko e so bago nga‖. (Laughter) All right. So, they parted ways. The girl went on her way but while she was there at Recto Ave formerly Ascarga, if you will still recall, nobody knows anymore where Ascarga is…its C.M. Recto. The girl suddenly remembered that she promised her siblings that that day she is going to buy a lot of food for them as one of her brothers let us say for example has recovered from an illness. She remembered about the cellphone because she had no money. She went to a side street in C. M. Recto. She met a man. She said, ―Pare, are you not the buyer of cellphones here?‖ ―Oh yes, I‘m the buyer.‖ ―I have a cellphone here..new ha…how much would this cost?‖ ―Oh well, let‘s see, about P1,500‖. ―Make it P2,000 naman‖. ―P1,500.‖ The girl is actually desirous of getting money. Anyway, her boyfriend can always bring her a cellphone anytime she wants. Just try to (shall we call it) stall the whole thing because the man might change his mind [medyo blurred, sorry]. However, here comes another man who asked the man who is buying the cellphone, ―Pare, may pinagbibili ka bang cellphone?‖ ―Just a moment, lumayo-layo ka lang. I have a transaction here. Just give me five minutes‖. ―Okay, I‘ll buy that phone -P1,500. Take it or leave it.‖ So, the woman agreed. She was paid P1,500. Then the man went to the person who was buying the cellphone and said, ―Okay, you want to buy this…P2,000‖ ―Okay‖. He agreed but it turned out that the person buying the cellphone, aside from being the owner of the stolen cellphone, is a policeman. The man who was buying the cellphone was arrested. The woman who sold the cellphone was arrested. Now, the woman said why are you arresting me. ―You profited from the commission of the crime.‖ Eh, the policeman was studying law at that time. Under Article 19 of the RPC paragraph 1, anyone who profits from the commission of any crime, etc., is an accessory. ―You profited from the commission of the crime of theft, etc. then you are an accessory‖. ―Aside from that,‖ the man said, ―you are a fence‖. ―How can I become a fence? I do not know what is fencing‖. ―No…anyone who with intent to gain, shall deal in, shall sell, shall buy, shall deliver, etc., any personal property which has been derived from the crime of robbery or theft is considered a fence. The man was also arrested. They were brought to court, etc. Now, they said. ―You have to choose whether you are going to charge us under the RPC as a felony or you are going to charge us for the violation of the Anti-Fencing Law as an offense. The policeman said, ―Whether I file a felony, of which you are an accessory to the crime of theft or violation of the AntiFencing Law, would not matter because even a single act that was committed by you may constitute a violation of the RPC and may constitute also a violation of a special law. And both can be prosecuted at the same time and judgment can be rendered in both cases without you being placed in double jeopardy. That has been the ruling of the Supreme Court in several cases where a single act would constitute a felony and an offense at the same time. Even in the crime of (shall we call it) obstruction of justice. In paragraph 2, harboring, etc.,concealing, etc., a person has been customated, etc., of a crime, etc., or destroying evidence under pgh 3 or whatever…that person is liable as an accessory also under Article 19 and at the same time, he is also liable for obstruction of justice. Then, he may be prosecuted without him being placed in double jeopardy for both crimes. So, a single act may result to being a felony and at the same time an offense. You must have to remember that because there are times when what you know only is that if a person violates any provision of the RPC, concededly, you will say that he only committed a felony. But then, even that single act would constitute also an offense under a special law. There were so many. It used to be that illegal possession of firearms is still defined and punished under PD 1866. And that an illegally possessed firearm was used in the killing of another. There is only one act, the possession of the firearm which resulted in the killing of another but then during the time when PD 1866 was still in force, the crime of homicide may be prosecuted separately from the crime of illegal possession of firearms which is already passé or it is not anymore true because in RA 8294, illegal possession is already absolved in the crime of homicide and murder and in rebellion, treason, sedition and also attempted coup de etat. There is no such crime. Is there a crime of attempted coup de etat? Wala yun. I don‘t know how Sen. Revilla arrived at a (shall we call it) or his researchers arrived at a crime of attempted coup de etat. Even if the coup de etat is attempted or whatever, it is still coup de etat. Alright. So, you are now familiar with how to treat a felony, on how to treat an offense. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW But then, how about say for example violation of municipal ordinance. It is, of course, known to everyone that if any legislative body passes any ordinance, which is penal in nature, it will define the act that will be punishable and it will provide the penalty for the same. Just like an offense. Like just a felony. The only problem here that has been the subject of debates is whether violation of a municipal ordinance is a crime. I think that‘s not even in your book. Do you see a crime? But it is not a crime because a crime has general application. Meaning to say that the two general characteristics of criminal law must be present in the crime, even the third. The two characteristics are generality and territoriality. Now, it would only mean that it is applicable to all those who sojourns or lives in the Philippines and that the act or omission that is punishable by law must have been committed within the territory of the Philippines or under certain exceptions in certain instances, it may apply to territories beyond our jurisdiction depending upon the circumstances, such as in an airship, a ship, etc., or even if the same is committed outside of the territory of the Philippines if it is a crime against the law of nations, or if, say for example, a case in regard to counterfeiting of currencies etc. or the introduction of those counterfeited currencies in the Philippines or instruments irrespective of the GENERAL Now. that is. even an ambassador or any person who possesses diplomatic immunity may be prosecuted under 9156. it covers all those who sojourns or lives in the Philippines. such as what. nevertheless. it cannot be considered as a crime. under 9156. It is only good for a certain. criminal law would also deal about its characteristics.. Maybe. conventions. a municipality or when the same is an ordinance of a province or a resolution of the province. The general characteristics of criminal law are three. as you know. there are certain persons that are exempted from criminal prosecution in our country. It may be an infraction of a (shall we call it) an ordinance. There is a provision there which says that it is an aggravating circumstance if the offender facilitates the commission of the crime or facilitate the commission of any violation of RA 9156 with the use of diplomatic passports or with the use of diplomatic channels or well. it is protected (?) within the territory of that province or in the event that it is a (shall we call it) an ordinance of the Metro Manila Commission. So.place where it was committed we have jurisdiction over those crimes or that felony. so you can go to the other town and spit without being held liable for violation of the ordinance. there is no problem with generality except that. well. those who belongs to the diplomatic corps. 1. So. Supposing there is an ordinance in a town prohibiting the spitting in public places but the next town there is no such ordinance. that by reason of treaties. such as diplomat. it is only of local application. the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. No. committees.. it has only of local application.) Prospective. But then. But we have a problem in that respect. it has a local application and therefore it cannot be considered as a crime because a crime has a wider application meaning that it covers the entire Philippines. but if there is a penalty being imposed for any act or omission committed by the offender. with the use of the influence of a diplomatic. hmmm. this will be questioned . I. a crime in order to become as such must be passed by law first. now.. of course. including their entourage are (shall we call it) not supposed to be prosecuted in this country. As I was saying.) Territorial and 3. Okay. naturally the offender there would be at least either a co-conspirator in violating the law on dangerous drugs. definite and limited territory such as a town. etc. that is. It cannot apply to the next town. in RA 9156. Meaning to say that there must be a law that must be passed by Congress or must be decreed by the President in cases when there is Martial Law or when the President is so authorized by the Constitution. etc. when you speak of an ordinance. Some of you will reason out that. etc. etc. 2.. The problem there that would usually be of importance is said can you consider an ordinance a crime.) General in nature. then within the confines of the Metro Manila area. etc. you do not know the highest point in tide. the seawater usually goes even up and up towards some portion already of the land. But then. When it is high tide. as long as he is present and that we can acquire our jurisdiction over him. That is not what the law says. We all know that the Philippines is an archipelago..later as years go by in the event that there is a member of the diplomatic corps who may have been caught violating the provisions of RA 9165 (parang wrong number…J) Also. Some of them has already sunk or have sunk so not anymore complete. he quarreled with almost anyone he met. That was then our territorial jurisdiction. well. Territoriality is simply that the crime must be committed within Philippine territory with the exception of those found in Article 2 and other (shall we call it) existing laws in the Philippines. When he arrived at the airport. I don‘t like Filipinos. in this generality that is where you are going to look at laws of preferential applications. To be measured from the highest point of tide. we are still an archipelago. So. I‘m very sure that all of you are familiar with the archipelagic doctrine that as you have been taking this doctrine in your poli or . Do you know what is the highest point of tide? Some of you have been going to beaches. then you have territoriality. It was changed because of the adoption in 1987 of the archipelagic doctrine. a passenger of a Korean airlines or whatever boarded the plane in New York their destination is Seoul. he can be prosecuted in this country. is the fact that he does not want to be in the Philippines to be considered as an exemption in respect to the criminal prosecution that may progress against him…NO. It cannot. 3-miles from where? From the shore?. TERRITORIAL Okay. II.110 or 107 islands. There was a question that I asked one time. His reason was that I do not want even to be in your country. Korea. There was a typhoon so the plane has to be directed to Manila. It must be 3-nautical miles from the highest point in tide. Because in the 1935 and 1972 Constitution. nevertheless. The Korean was drunk because he is afraid of (shall we call it) the bumpy ride as there was a typhoon and he drinks too much wine.NO. It is composed of 7. And the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines then was to be measured from that highest point of tide that was reached by the water and you measure three-nautical miles going to the sea. etc. the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines with respect to oceans and seas that surrounds us is 3-nautical miles from the highest point.. he was arrested and put to prison as he was able to injure somebody and that somebody complained. Even if the offender do not wish even step on our land. And we have abandoned the (shall we call it) doctrine in regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines as the 1935 and the 1972 Constitution provides.. and you know for a fact that this would naturally affect the generality of the characteristic of our penal law. that is. Well. The archipelagic doctrine only (shall we call it) says that the Philippine territory with respect to the large body of water that surrounds us must be. Draw another straight line until you reach the first straight. The. But do not state piracy only. territoriality —there are certain exceptions. so forth and so on based on the outermost point of the islands and there you are…you have the archipelagic doctrine which will compose of the territory of the Philippines. draw a straight line. The same old faces. . we have not yet actually passed a law which would be of use to us in connection with crimes that are committed in other countries of which we have jurisdiction except those that are in violation of the law of nations such as what…piracy.constitutional law. It is simple. That shall be considered as the baseline. Beyond that we do not have jurisdiction. If you are going to look into it only you don‘t have to be very very adept in describing the (shall we call it) terms that were used in the Constitution or interpretation but that would suffice. I said well. But because of RA7659.. in the general characteristic of a criminal law. What you have to do is draw a straight line from those two points and then look for another outermost point of an island. which includes the land mass includes all the bodies of water. that is. when a public officer or employee commits a crime in relation to the performance of his duties outside of the Philippines. the Heinous Crime Law. From that baseline. We have what we call local piracy. must include 12 nautical miles from the baseline of the archipelago. introduction of counterfeited coins and currencies and also crimes against law of nations and also there are new offenses that are considered as trans-national crimes. kilabot ka talaga…J) whom I‘ve met about three years…four years ago? Some of you have changed a little. then he is still as if he is still committing the crime within our Philippine territory. I did explain a little about archipelagic doctrine when you were still taking up your Crim 1 because I see familiar faces (Uy…Aze. And likewise. counterfeiting of coins. The local piracy is now defined and punished under RA 7659 which was actually transferred to the provisions of the RPC as an amendment to the law on piracy. there is an express repeal of the law on local piracy in PD 532. you measure a distance of 12-nautical miles. etc. the next outermost point of the other island next to it. it should be piracy in the high seas because that is the crime against the law of nations. well. And also. first outermost point which encompasses the land mass. Although we are a member of certain organizations that recognizes trans-national crimes. And how do you determine the baseline? The baseline can be determined by actually locating the outer most points of an island. It used to be that local piracy is included in PD 532. As. the crime that has been committed was on a ship that was not registered in the Philippines. then we do not have jurisdiction. outside of the territorial limits of the Philippines. it depends upon whether (shall we call it) the Philippines may be able to obtain jurisdiction over that particular crime.. then irrespective of whether the ship was in transit. III. we apply those jurisprudence but thereafter we don‘t apply them anymore. Ah…you recall the cases involving drugs in your Book One. you may be held criminally liable and we have jurisdiction over the offender. Without our territorial jurisdiction. you are criminally liable. one of them says that if it is only a (shall we call it) problem between the cruise. Then. We adopt the French and Rousseau (?). Hmm…pampakapal lang yan. But because of the passage then of RA 6425 which repealed the provisions of Article 190 and so forth of the RPC which makes violation of the law on drugs a special law. regarding marijuana which were cited in your book are only (shall we call it) cases to make your book a little bit thicker. airships etc. etc. then even if that ship is outside of the territory of the Philippines. If. we all know that the registration of a ship or airship (based on a thorough analysis of deciphering the words said) shall be the basis of the determination of jurisdiction. So. those are dead cases already. you would know that territoriality may have also some effect on ships. If the crime is committed within our territory irrespective of the registration of the ship. those cases regarding opiums. But if the offender was found only to be in possession of marijuana in a ship in transit to another country.Well. then the jurisdiction is naturally with (shall we call it). etc. irrespective of whether you want to smoke it or not.. in the event that it does not affect only the administration of the ship or in connection with management to proceed. uhmm… what are the true rules regarding ships that where the place of commission of any offense or crimes. we have jurisdiction. it does not matter because the jurisdiction is that country in which the ship is registered. that is when registration will be the basis of jurisdiction. we apply those laws. Is it still there? The cases of smoking of opium. look. But then. irrespective of whether you have the intention to use the drugs or not. the crime may be tried in the country where that ship is registered. Because if they are of no use already of course its also worth while to know that such cases can be compared to the cases now (noh) and you will know that in the years before the repeal of Article 190. if you smoke marijuana in a commercial ship docked in Philippine waters. etc. But. smoking marijuana.. say for example. PROSPECTIVE . They are not anymore applicable. etc. I should say…reclusion perpetua to death. Martin Simon y Sunga and in the cases of Robin Padilla. Hmm… All penal laws. How about those who are repeat offenders? Are they disqualified from the retroactivity of penal laws? No. While the case is on appeal with the Supreme Court. Reclusion perpetua. where if the dangerous drugs are sold or possessed. which will be a bill of attainder. The first is the . which will violate due process of law. You recall those cases? Martin Simon…you recall the case of Martin Simon? I discussed that in Book One and even in Special Laws. There are actually three theories. marijuana…5 teabags of marijuana in Guagua. As provided for in the same law. That is 7659 and well in the event that it is over 750 then you have to divide by three the remaining marijuana. He was sentenced to life imprisonment under RA 6425. It will become retroactive only in the event that it favors the accused. it must be prospective in nature. The two-third portion will carry with it the penalty of prision mayor and the other portion will carry with it the penalty of reclusion perpetua. do you have any questions in the meantime before I proceed? None…Then. criminal laws must be prospective in nature Because it would violate the limitations on the passage of a penal laws that ―no laws shall be passed which will be an ex post facto law. the weight of the drugs is a important in imposing the appropriate penalty. At that time. You just look at Article 22 of the RPC then there you are. He was immediately released because the new law has a retroactive effect. prospectivity. we go to ahmm… we have actually taken up the three characteristics. So. In cases of marijuana. THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW Okay. Congressman De Guzman and others. the penalty shall be life imprisonment to death. Pampanga. if the weight of the marijuana is 750 grams and above. retroactivity naturally has an exception.Okay. the theories of criminal law. Martin Simon has served already 6 years of his life imprisonment sentence. The penalty that was imposed only to Martin Simon by the Supreme Court considering the retroactivity of the law which is favorable to Martin Simon is only up to 4 years and 2 months.. The one-third would be the (shall we call it) should be punished by the least of the penalties which is prision correccional. You recall that Martin Simon was convicted of posing drugs. That because Martin Simon only sold not more than 50 grams of marijuana which is not even 1/3 of the weight prescribed. Now. not only two. This was illustrated in the (shall we call it) the case of People v.. What is the exception when a law has a retroactivity effect? Does it have any exception? Huh? What is the exception? If the law provides otherwise —number 1. No problem about prospectivity. the RA 7659 took effect and you know that in RA 7659. tape ends…) . But that is as far as you can go. Don‘t you have any chance of reformation when the person is dead already. Now. entitled to even a pardon…unconditional pardon or even an absolute pardon. he is still in the stream f the society where he belongs. give an example of laws that is an application of the positivist theory or a question of that sort. I would explain how it come to pass that there is a mixed theory. In the positivist theory. you will note that we have several laws wherein the positivist theory is applied. the court gives a person the opportunity of trying to show the society that even if he is outside of the walls of prison. second is the classical and the third is the mixed theory. What is that for? What is the (shall we call it) the purpose of fixing the minimum and the maximum. Let‘s see. Meaning to say that the penalty that is being imposed upon the offender in classical theory is afflictive in nature. Only that his liberty is restricted. why is it that there is an indeterminate sentence? There should be a minimum and there should be a maximum. to rehabilitate him. The purpose why the penalty is being imposed to an offender. you cannot impose a penalty of straight one year and one day.positivist theory. The purpose is reformation. The moment that that person has served the minimum. if you are asked in the bar. And remember. It depends on (shall we call it) his behavior while he was serving or he is serving sentence. It is more of the affliction of pain upon the offender. if you are going to apply of the classical theory it is more of retribution. There is no more chance of reforming. In other words. but there are penalties that are afflictive in nature that is also (shall we call it) for the purpose of reformation and rehabilitation. etc. That is prohibited now by the new decision of the SC. can you give me…can you cite for me the laws or can you give me some laws? Ha?!…tignan nyo. Give me another law. So. it deprives the accused of the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. he is entitled to a commutation of sentence. On the other hand. that is one law. the purpose of imposing a penalty to an offender is naturally to report him. You can impose a penalty of straight one year. Well. the SC recognizes that in imposing a penalty there is always a hope of reformation and rehabilitation. the exercise of… (Oh no. Now. Well. if the penalty is death and it is executed. naturally what happens? He is entitled to parole. But then. Probation Law…because in probation law. According to the SC. I thought that you know criminal law already. ladies and gentlemen. there is a recent decision of the SC that prohibits the imposition of a straight penalty when the maximum of the penalty to be imposed is more than a year unless of course it is a penalty of six months as minimum to 2 year and 4 months. this theories have for their basis the imposition of the penalty. Look at the Indeterminate Sentence Law. he can still be considered as serving his sentence. So. if there are still some. meaning that there are so many thieves. near his bed. As a matter of fact. it‘s actually (shall we call it) like what is now the natural forest in Northern Luzon. There should be other circumstances that should be present in order to excuse him from criminal liability. And Achong is a nervous person. That was the condition at that time in Fort William McKinley now Fort Bonifacio. the Supreme Court was laying down the basis for the (shall we call it) the judgment that they are going to render. Lets say in the case of US v. look.DATE: JUNE 25. They said that as long as when one is afraid of bad elements. I told you that mistake of fact can come only in certain cases when there is an exercise of ones rights that would justify the act that was performed by another. I do not know the others. if not for the fact that Achong believed that the intruder at that time in his room was the bad elements that he was afraid of at Fort William McKinley. I‘m sure that some of my students have read the case of US v. his kitchen knife and of course whenever his . Fort William McKinley at that time was a forested area. as a cook he has to rent a room together with another person who also works in the same place. But this person who (shall we call it) is the roommate of Achong knows of the fear of Achong as at that time in Fort William McKinley there are so many bad elements. You probably have read the case and in the few (shall we call it) paragraphs of the case. So. then in the event that he (shall we call it) inflicts injury upon that person then he is already excused from criminal liability. But it is a MUST for a first year law student to read the case of US v. 2003 Wednesday MISTAKE OF FACT Last time. The only problem there is some have a wrong interpretation of US v. The facts (shall we call it) must be complete. I made mention of some principles that even a first year law student has already became to learn. robbers. whenever he sleeps he brings along with him. Achong. The facts of course are very familiar to you. But it is worthwhile to remember them because some may have the wrong impressions about the interpretation of the laws. Achong. killers. Achong. Achong was a nervous Chinaman who just came from China and he has to get some employment in the country even as a cook at Fort William McKinley. Because of the fear of Achong of bad elements. Achong. or in Mindanao. you will note that it was emphasized by the Supreme Court that Achong was from China. Alright. if you will recall. You know. Then he would not have been excused from criminal liability. etc. Achong. That is not correct. unless you never read the case of US v.. Later on. he even has the (shall we call it) obligation to himself to put away the knife of any person who is going to take also his life. And he was asking who is outside of the door. he props a chair. would there be a mistake of fact? There would be none.. The good elements are the ones at home. Had Achong known that the one who was trying to enter is his friend. So. And then. well when the person who was outside forced his way in just to scare Achong. So. the chair hit Achong. after they were able to light the place. etc. It should be the reverse the bad elements should be at home and the good elements should always be outside to look for them.. looking back at the facts that were enumerated by the SC… the belief of Achong. Achong believed that he is being attacked by a bad element. because of fear. and the acts performed by Achong. Achong was allegedly awakened by the loud banging of the door. there you are. in the preparatory statements of the SC you know that they are trying to lay down the basis in that particular case. Achong. So. Had it been true that the man who was trying to cause his way in was a bad element. It was dark. the person would not even say a word. what happened. etc. he would be well within his right to (shall we call it) protect his life and in protecting his life. etc. what they used for lighting are only the wits (?) etc. all the (shall we call it) preparatory facts have been enumerated by the Supreme Court in order for the SC may have a basis in what they are going to say later on. Now. Meaning to say that he always wants to play jokes on Achong because he knows that Achong is a nervous Chinaman. the condition of the place at that time. Meaning to say that it could not even illuminate the room very well.. what happened. Not only the mistake of some facts but taken altogether in the case of Achong because if one of those facts that were enumerated by the SC in that case is missing. there are times when the case are not being explained properly but you have to look at the case properly in order that you would be able to appreciate how the SC arrived at said conclusion. there are no electricity. even if that chair had hit him.companion in the room goes out and (shall we call it) is not yet in the room he usually locks the room. The SC came to the conclusion that it is not a misapprehension actually of facts only it was a mistake of the ACTUAL facts. it would not even be a mistake of fact. I mean. So. Have you ever read any case before the US v. But this guy who was the roommate of Achong is (shall we call it) a joker. where the SC used . nobody goes out except the bad elements. the chair flew towards the direction of Achong. it is simple. or is his roommate. The moment then that the sun sets at the west. He got his knife and when he saw a dark figure approaching him. he stabbed the image of a man. The mistake of the facts surrounding the circumstances. Those were the conditions of the times. at that time. the man whom he stabbed is his roommate. etc. (2X) So. and then had it been true that Achong was attacked because a hard object hit him. from the decision itself. SO. as you will find from the records of the case. Remember that the phrase ―mistake of fact‖ was used by the SC for the first time only in that case. there were only two. Because it is and it was a good decision. That is why this is a jurisprudence which almost all cases followed and it has never been modified by the SC. They say that ―radial conspiracy‖ is just like a wheel. You are supposed to be guilty considering the theory of ―radial conspiracy‖. 2. in the case of People v.. etc. there can be no mistake of fact there because the circumstances is not almost the same. we will go to that when the proper time come. You will find the same a littl e bit intriguing. Well. as long as he achieved the purpose for which the principal offender has attained. and those spaces in between the scopes (?) are the participants. Only that in the case of People v. I believe of Estrada v. not even 10% the same as that of the case of People v.the word-mistake of fact? There have been no case that was decided by the SC of which it applied the phrase ―mistake of fact‖—NONE. But in ―radial conspiracy‖ even if the people who is within the radius do not know what is the purpose of one. 3. Arroyo.)mistake in identity which they claim will excuse them from criminal liability because of the peculiar situation that the person whom they have been looking for is a notorious criminal. I‘m just trying to tell you that on the same manner that this ‗mistake of fact‘ was coined by the SC in the case of Achong. All we know about conspiracy is what—Everybody must have conspired and confederated and if there is no evidence of their confederation of their agreement. They were ordered to bring such criminal dead or alive to the assailant. etc. actually there are three defenses that Oanes and company put up in that particular case although in the book of Reyes. you will meet certain cases like now the SC again invented a new phrase in the case. its just the same. Oanes. Well. But then. Sandiganbayan or something like that.)they even invoked mistake of fact. But what I remember is that the SC coined another kind of conspiracy and that is ―radial conspiracy‖. Achong. Well. MISTAKE IN IDENTITY Well. Now. not in the original copy. it is the concerted acts of these people tending towards the same end that should be considered. While one is in fact looking for Balagtas. going to mistake of fact. the three were… 1. The fact is that one is a company who is ordered by their superior to look for a certain Balagtas who is a well-known criminal.)regularity in the performance of their official functions. there should be sufficient proof that they have at least known the purpose of one and they joined the purpose of the other. In the middle of the wheel there is wh at we call the places where you connect the scopes (? Sorry can‘t make out what he said eh wala ako alam about wheels) towards the outer part of the wheel. or Estrada v. I failed to remember the actual title of the case. that is ―radial conspiracy‖. they were informed that a man fitting the description of Balagtas is in a hut in the . Oanes it is different and I know that you are familiar with that case. you won‘t have any fear that another checkpoint will be put up by somebody else. the perception is that they abused their authority and they are not regularly performing their duty. Since when…have the police been authorized to take the law into their own hands. they said. They will plant. he will take time. of being arrested. we want to be disciplined eh. you can travel without fear etc.we only came to (shall we call it) that particular attitude or we developed that attitude after two years or 3 years of Martial Law. But now it is different.. And then well. they saw a person fitting the description of what they claim to be Balagtas and despite the fact that that person was lying on the bamboo splits which serves as the floor of the hut and with the back turned towards them and apparently is slipping. etc. Even those who does not believe in the administration wants also to be disciplines. you know. And then you squat on the lot of another. whenever they are involved in an incident. They will charge you and that is correct. So. Wouldn‘t that be nice? Oh ngayon…hindi na. now we do not believe anymore in the regularity in the performance of the official functions of public officers or employees. your comment probably speaks of the minds of the youngsters or the young generation today. the farmer. not food.. they discovered that the man is Tengco. Well. will plant (shall we call it) vegetables or edible fruits there. Those were the days. Linis Ko‖ it all started during Martial Law…don‘t you know that? Etong mga ginagamit na slogan ngayon. it is actually their fault also and it is the fault of the generations as well…uhmm. In between any checkpoints. It was after three years or so when the military authorities and the peace officers started to abuse even those people from the government offices. hindi… mali yan… talaga naman. We always say. That public officers or employees.middle of the field. then you can go on your way.. had it been true that Tengco is Balagtas. if you have a lot which you have forgotten to be existing so you have not even cleaned it. the slogans ―Tapat Ko. you just go to a private of the Philippine Army or a private of the Integrated National Police or the Police. there are food that can be taken out from your even residential lot. no cockroaches. Even during the olden times it is not allowed. they were slogan of Martial Law. So. The first two or three years of Martial Law were good. At that time. And when they went there. of course. what. And the municipality will charge you for fencing it and for planting things there. They were. they shot the person full of force. You can just imagine at that time. all that you have to do if there is a checkpoint is stop and allow these people to go over your things by merely looking at it. shanties and they will produce. he will take the trouble of going there and tell the one squatting to discontinue with what he is doing otherwise you will see yourself in jail. Well. the city or municipality which has jurisdiction over your lot will clean the same. Drivers were disciplined…drivers…ay. How much more during that time…how much more now. When they turned over the body. No rodents. they are well within their exercise of duty in (shall we call it) shooting Tengco because he is a well-known criminal. but people. You will not believe me but then. hindi . You know what Ariel Ureta did at that time while he was in his show. his television show? He just said. aberratio ictus etc. not the president today but a former President. ―Sa ikauunlad ng bayan. no problem with that. okay. sa ikauunlad pala ng bayan yan. a wrong belief that mistake in identity. here comes the wife or the sister of another then that was the time when the one exercising self-defense triggered the blow to defend himself and hit the person who intervened. it is always justified. It turned out that he is another person. Article 3 of the Civil Code. Unlike also in error in personae etc.bisikleta…alright. even mistake of fact. (hagikgikan ang mga pipolJ) That is true. ―Ignorance of the law excuse no one from compliance therewith‖.. Ahhh… he could . All right. the people in Congress who may be excused from Ignorance of the Law. you ask Ariel Ureta (heheheJ) So. You see. sometimes. So. MISTAKE IN THE BLOW Well. then he is criminally liable. It‘s only of course... How could that be regular. When the slogan of Marcos is ―Sa ikauunlad ng bayan. but if he does not. I have already explained. I give you already an example where two men who were in the midst of a quarrel and one tries to defend himself. regularity in the performance of public functions which does actually exist will be a defense—No. Either that he may be justified or that he may not be justified. disiplina ng kailangan‖. that is regularity in the performance of public functions which was not present at that time. they are going to ask you to go to Crame just like Ariel Ureta. The error in law or mistake in law. in aberratio ictus as I said one is exercising a justifiable act then there could be an excuse in aberratio ictus. The cases punished is an example of.huli ka…paghuli sayo.magbisikleta ka dyan. he said ok. you shoot a man sleeping that is treachery. bisikleta ang kailangan‖.. let‘s go to Crame. say for example. it is always not an excuse if it is error in personae. Because you cannot take the law into your own hands. you all know. who called the Senate President and the Speaker of the House and ordered them to see to it that Congress amend the ‗law of supply and demand‘.pwede yang ahas ahas mong yan. he said it is bisikleta. there was a mistake in the blow but the mistake in the blow was in the exercise of selfdefense and therefore it is excused form criminal liability.. You did not even tried to verify whether he is the same person you are looking for. there is no regularity in the performance of public function. But then you see where Erap is now. or the President of the Philippines. Unlike in complete mistake of fact. I believe that if a person committed a mistake in the blow there could be two things that could happen. Probably even if what he did are within the bounds of the law but I don‘t --uhmm---the error in law that I know that the President was excused was when the President of the Philippines was at one point. Well. So. Kasi pag hindi na pwedeng pagandahin. Naturally. sa ayaw maging taga-araro araw araw. Wala sa pamilya natin ang bakla o bading. Pero ngayon. the typical malum prohibitum is BP no. such as what. Now. these are special laws. etc. Oh…ano ano magbabakla-bakla ka…kailangang maging lalaki ka. You can look at the records of the decisions of the SC. the mother and the father are encouraging these people. Because then. He may also be excused if he tries to violate the law of gravity. tsaka ng mga kapatid. You can be a beautician. and everything. 6 then 8294. That is how these particular phenomenon are being cured at that time. he will act like a real man. it will be carried throughout the years. do you know what they are? BP #6 is a law that prohibits the carrying of bladed weapons which you are not using for your occupation. you must be a magician para gumanda yan. he will forget his inclination. killing people not in the act of self-defense. MALA PROHIBITA Now. connected to all these are. It is a special law but then since time immemorial it's bad to steal. sometimes a magician. Theft of transmission lines. But there never had been any case that has been filed during those years about acts of lasciviousness involving two persons who are of the same sex…none. there is no such crime that was ever filed and if there is it did not reach the SC. Gulpi sarado yan. of course.. Like. ―hindi. All that. even if you have a tendency to become a sissy or you have a tendency of leaning towards the other sex. So. raping a man or a woman but then raping a man is not a crime as rape it was then only an act of lasciviousness. the distinction between mala in se and malum prohibitum. there is no more problem regarding this. O paano gagawin…Sige. it will be cured by probably a rope or it will be cured by a cane or something else. stealing the property of another. those who are . Talagang gagawing lalaki yan. the most vulgar term now is bakla or bading. stealing (you know) properties of the government etc. we call them ‗binabae‘ at that time because his ways etc. for example. (Si sir.be excused for that.. theft of electricity. tsaka ng mga tiyo. stealing his wife.. he moves like a woman. MALA IN SE v. I‘m just trying to tell you that were the attitude of the people of yesteryears. but there are times when malum prohibitum are by themselves mala in se. you have a future there. ikaw ang mag-araro araw-araw. that it should be abhorred. he does not want to plow the field everyday. You are still young…you know when I was young…if a man is called ‗binabae‘. those that are wrong from the very beginning. it is by its very nature wrong. It is not actually a written law but it is a natural law. funny pala J) Those were things that well. Parating gulpi ng tatay yan. But then. After some years he is being called as ‗babayote‘. Okay. all of the felonies that are defined and punished under the RPC are considered as mala in se. The right use of these plants are beneficial to us. they carry bolos whenever they got the farm. . did the people from Bicol rose against them—they did not.. But under 9165. It used to be that you can carry whatever bladed weapon you want to carry because it is the nature of farmers. But it is of a limited nature not a (shall we call it) not in the nation because there were only nine provinces which rose against the Spanish regime. fishing etc. Hindi pwedeng sabihin mong si Barbers even if he resign as a Senator. But then the Filipinos are known to be farmers.. And then now they are quarrelling as to who is going to be the head…the ultimate head. Nag-away pa nga si Aguinlado tsaka si Andres Bonifacio…o. And yet we are celebrating the Independence Day on June 12. So. Yes! I learned that from my grandmother. learning from history we can see that mala in se may be also a malum prohibitum depending upon the circumstances. the water there etc. Kaya mali rin yang declaration ng June as Independence Day. What will you use if you go to the farm? Have you sharpened your hands to substitute for a bolo? (heheheJ) So. All others who may be appointed by the President shall be under him.. during the times of (shall we call it) Limahong etc. Alright so. He will still be under the Director of PDEA because that is the law. possession of drugs is simply malum prohibitum because…(whoops…tape produces a weird sound—Aze ran for back upJ) (2nd tape) Your great great grandparents etc. Even drugs at one point. Now. HE was the one who authored it. those who are cooks etc. woodcutters. Did Visayas participated. believes that marijuana if boiled. ayun patay si Andres Bonifacio. and they have to use these kinds of bladed weapons.. hindi eh. it is the nature of Filipinos at that time whose main preoccupation are farming. ―we will be suspected of being pushers‖. we used these escopetas (mukhang Spanish word—I‘m not sureL) because at that time we have the right to bear arms. Wag naman nilang sabihin na the entire Philippines rose against the Spaniards. they are exempted. But they do not want to do it now. the (shall we call it) its not a soup noh…the boiled marijuana. Did Mindanao rose against these people? Did the people from Batanes etc. fishermen.. yung mga from the Visayas because its only nine provinces that claimed to have rose against the Spaniards at that time. So. it becomes malum prohibitum. is used to relieve stomach pains. Kaya dapat magalit ang mga Bisaya dun. Filipinos even during the times when there were Battles of Biak na Bato or whatever.exempted are butchers etc. even firearms. he cannot violate the law that he himself authored that is why he discontinued with his plan of resigning. it is not wrong per se. the head of the imposement (is there such a word?J) of RA 9165 is the director of the PDEA. If you ask the laboratory people etc. Because of the strict implementation of the new laws on drugs. the SC said that it is necessary for the State to prove animum posidendi in order to secure conviction of an accused in the charge of illegal possession of firearms. intent is necessary in that particular special law. you will see sometimes some weird decisions of the Supreme Court regarding drugs. About intent and motive. What will happen? There is only be a mitigating circumstance. urinating he saw a garden patch. And he . Something is really developing on the law on illegal possession of firearms and further you will note the jurisprudence laid down by the SC in 8294. If he does not have any intention to kill. If he intended to commit a (shall we call it) more serious offense. illegal possession of firearms. Have you ever heard of (shall we call it) the case in drugs that a policeman who was on a follow-up case who was urinating in a makeshift fence made of leaves of coconut and other branches of (shall we call it) bushes. the same. So. that is. he performed an illegal act but it resulted in a killing. in connection with illegal possession of firearms. ―I have no intention to violate RA 8294. ―Kayo nagpasa nyan sir eh. And it went further by saying that transient (?) possession of firearms which does not have any license does not make the offender criminally liable. Bakit kayo magiging head? You made the head of the PDEA as the Chief Implementing Officer of the law and all other will be under the PDA. somebody gave him the right advice. then he will be punished for the minor offense only. even in drugs. Well. That is now a very specific malum prohibitum law. but what was committed was only a minor offense. you will not that this intent is sometimes only necessary to determine the extent of criminal liability of the offender. MOTIVE Okay. Sabihin mo. So. Intent is not an issue in special laws or in malum prohibitum. on mala in se and malum prohibitum. Whether you have an intention to violate the law or not.Yes. In two decisions of the SC. INTENT v. you are still liable. It is not for the accused to prove that he has a license that it is for the prosecution to establish that he has no license. Well. These are the developments in criminal law esp. What? Considering that the allegation that the accused do not have any license then found to be in possession of a gun is a negative allegation. he will only be convicted for the minor offense. It is up to the prosecution to prove by proof beyond reasonable doubt that negative allegation. Okay. When is the determination of intent necessary? When? Sometimes the determination of what is the intent of the offender would affect only the extent of his criminal liability in most times. Failure on the part of the prosecution to establish that he has no license. you see the developments in criminal law. So. He intended to commit a major offense but he committed only a minor offense. But then the Supreme Court is never turning towards making RA 8294 as mala in se. he is entitled to acquittal. When there is an inherent impossibility of accomplishing a particular act or crime or when there is an employment of ineffectual and inadequate means. may marijuana plantation dun. they formed a team etc. in his property etc— accdg to the SC. Charged him with cultivation of marijuana. There is evidence that somebody . Its not the same as when the police officers received information that several. spread that woman was found dead. Eh. There is legal impossibility when actually under ordinary circumstances. kita mo na. what he did was to go to his chief of police.)Legal impossibility and 2. Do you know what happened? Huh? (Silence) Accdg to the SC. You know what he found? Marijuana plants. meters.‖ Oh. news. he forcibly entered the home of that woman through the window. But the SC said that you searched when you peeped through the hole. So. The next morning. ―Sir. The police may say that it is in plain view. Just like your iced tea— bottomless (heheheJ) There are so many (shall we call it) sometimes unbelievable decisions. they peeped through the hole and saw these people packing so they barged in the door. uprooted the plants. accidental pa. the search. that two persons were repacking shabu inside a hand-shafty (?) and well the police officers upon being informed went there and then they went around the place. the arrest are all illegal. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME About impossible crimes. So. he had sex with the woman. may be divided into two. as you know in neighbors. The first. brought the plants to the police station. nandun ka na nga eh. And seeing that the woman is only wearing a night piece or whatever. This states the fact that this is malum prohibitum. the first one is the Aminundin (?) case. Now that rape has been transferred from crime against chastity to crime against persons. We did not search. We can go on and on because it is endless. inherent impossibility of accomplishing a crime. while the law on drugs is malum prohibitum yet we have to establish that the rights of that person was not violated and what right —the right to be secured in his person. there could be no legal accomplishment.) Physical impossibility.noticed what was planted in the garden patch of about 1. that is not an application of ‗plain view‘ because the police officers have all the time to secure a search warrant. 1.000 sq. So. Acquitted. saw a small hole. they went to the place and they accosted the owner and the person who is alleged to be tending the plantation they arrested him. a person went to the house of a beautiful woman and that person is already entertaining lewd and he has already wanted her carnal knowledge of that woman. and arrested these two people etc. confiscated the shabu etc. For example. the seizure. hindi nga kilala. nandyan yan. multo!‖ But when they asked around they were informed that that person did not sleep in the house that Thursday night. ―Alam mo bukas. So. Babalik yan madaling araw.‖ They do not have any evidence. Can there be any legal possibility of the woman being raped? No. umaalis yan pag gabi. They do not even know why. had sex with the woman. Not even a cockroach will live. not legal. Di naman nya kilala. these neighbors said. Can you steal an article that has already been consumed or a food that has already been consumed by the owner or by somebody else. is alive. Positioned themselves and thinking that the person is already there as the information that reached them is that at 8 o‘clock that person is already home and it is already 9 o‘clock and the person would be asleep. That is physical impossibility.‖ When they were already trying to enjoy themselves the next day. And sometimes their distinction of the two is different from each other or sometimes wrong. ―kailan ba natutulog si Pedro dyan sa kanyang bahay na itinayo? Balita namin natutulog sya dyan paminsan minsan ng walang kasama‖. not legal. there is no legal possibility that the woman can be raped. ―alam mo yang neighbor kong yan…tulak yan. And they were able to establish that at the time of the intercourse. that is physical impossibility. How about the distinction between the employment of ineffectual means and frustrated or attempted. So. it is a legal impossibility of accomplishment. madaldal ang neighbors eh. They now (shall we call it) try to determine the time of the death of the woman. Kahit dito sa Maynila. ―Patay na yan. the authorities then tried to investigate. they peppered (?) the entire house with bullets coming from automatic rifles. they asked the people around. they were surprised and amazed to see the person in the market. let us say for example…I will just give an example for the .. they conducted surveillance. the woman is already dead because she suffered heart attack two hours prior to the intercourse. Can you kill a person when he is not in the place where you wanted to kill him—NO. you know the neighbors. this people who wanted to kill that person prepared themselves for Thursday or whatever. ―Huh. the time of the intercourse etc. O ganito yan‖. There would be frustrated crime…Oh. I never (shall we call it) encountered a neighbor who does not talk about his neighbor. then they left. of course. So. etc. There are some authors who cannot distinguish. So. tuwing Huwebes nandyan yan. The physical impossibility of accomplishment was the case of a group of persons who wanted to kill somebody. meaning to say. whether a woman or a man under the new law. So. No. eh anong ginagawa nya nagtutulak yan. So. Because rape can occur only when the offended party. ―O. naka-motorsiklo yan.touched the woman. Medyo ang lasa kumakagat eh. Nagyayaya si kumpare dun sa kabilang karaoke. the rest he spends for karaoke. The wife is already praying that he sings the song ‗My Way‘ in the karaoke bar. tinamaan lang dito yung asawa (pointing at his arms). di ba. I will do it My Way. Or shoot you dead. her husband arrived and a little bit tipsy still because he has been singing in the karaoke bar and drinking. sabi ng asawa. (Hehehe J. bakit naman parang bagong putahe itong binigay mo sa akin.meantime. The question now is was the cyanide which is the instrument to cause the death—remember. The husband is earning no less than 1. ayaw kantahin. Yung Johnson powder na plastic container. a person is armed with a gun.000-2. The fish would naturally recover etc. Do you know how they catch tropical fishes? Cyanide…not so much cyanide but they replaced some other (shall we call it)like a powder or a powder mixed it with cyanide.‖ (hahaha J). Eto.‖ Later on. only a few cyanide will leave the plastic container. Sabi ng asawa. the husband became suspicious. There was an investigation. But you know one spoonful of cyanide which is enough to kill an ordinary person did not kill her husband. spending money which should have been given to the family. that is employment of inadequate means. ―May natira pa pala akong pera dito.000 almost everyday but he gives his wife only P200. (4B with a loud Hahaha J). Bu the wife is waiting for her husband to drop dead. Somebody might stab you. . So. This man has been doing it for 20 years.‖ Siguro naiisip mo lang yan. So. so that we will know the distinction of an impossible crime and a frustrated or attempted crime. hindi. drinking with friends. If you squeeze it. malason nga. Eh. This fisherman has been engaged in gathering tropical fishes in the sea and selling these tropical fishes to a buyer. She went to (shall we call it) the suppliers of the chemical being used by her husband to catch tropical fishes. ―Sobra na itong asawa ko. And that would be enough to stun the tropical fishes. kain lang siya. One morning. Participative na ang mga tao kasi free cut sa CIV). ―Ayaw mong kantahin ang ‗My Way‖. sabi niya. You know. the wife said. So. ―Para bang may konting halong cyanide. she shot at her husband. She is a poor shooter. the cyanide although it is a weapon which if used may kill a person because of the strong constitution of the husband who developed almost an immunity from cyanide one spoonful of cyanide is not enough weapon to kill him. let us say for example another incident took place. A wife has a husband who is a fisherman. Was the weapon used by the wife sufficient if ever it was used properly to kill the husband? Yes. up to the time that they can sell it. ―Dear. and not to kill the husband of the victim it is not enough under the circumstances. So. of course. if your going to look at the two examples—in the use of cyanide. if you sing the song ‗My Way‘ delikado ka. All right. After eating. they have already a container which is being actually augmented by oxygen. Philandering etc. dun ilalagay yung cyanide. mixed it with the food of her husband.‖ She got a spoonful of cyanide. it turned out that the wife poisoned him. Binaril nya. ―sana kantahin na yang ‗My Way‘ para matapos na ang kalbaryo ko. Eh. Okay lang. Makapunta nga. Paggising nung amo. Eh kung tiga-Batangas. Eh. tama ba yun? That is correct.Inadequate yun. It must be enough or it must have the capacity to achieve your purpose. thank you. at the throat. Bakit dito nakalagay ito? Ah para dito ito…alright. of course. oh who is from Bohol? This is a joke. But. So. hindi pa naman umikot yung dumi dyan eh. hindi pa rin mamamatay eh. Walang nangyari. if the husband was hit. Oh. would that instrument she used be enough to kill not even to kill a fly. at the head etc. Do not always throw the coffee. I believe that some of you may still be wondering. One morning. Because the crime is already in her mind and what is being punished in impossible crime is the criminal propensity or tendency in the mind of the offender. naturally. He is fond of drinking coffee. ―Uy. kung tinamaan yung husband. hahanapin yung pakpak. I will place the cyanide in his coffee. Magagalit kasi yang Batangueño. yung Boholano. kinuha yung pinaglagyan niya. She went to sleep early so that she can serve her husband with a coffee mixed with cyanide. Pag tiga-Bohol daw. coffee. ―Ma-arrange nga itong mga ito. mare basta papalitan mo lang ha. Ah. After drinking coffee. Yun ang inadequate. (itinaktak ni sir yung imaginary fly) tsaka iinumin. I will make coffee for him. hindi pwedeng attempted eh. tinikman okay. he will be dropping dead. Darling. Sabi ng maid. ipainom mo man sa kanya. just like poison. ―Pare. Sasabihin mo attempted murder—in attempted murder the weapon must also be (shall we call it) effective to achieve your purpose. But if the fly naturally dived in the coffee it will drown itself.meron pa. because the weapon must be capable of achieving your purpose. But is there already a crime that she committed? YES. Ineffectual…talagang walang mangyayari kasi it won‘t have any effect ion the victim.‖ ―Ah. malason nag itong asawa ko. she investigated. mamatay ba? Siguro patay yun. Yun…would it have the capacity to achieve your purpose? Wala eh. the wife went to the market and she met one of the fisherman there. tsaka yung taga-Bohol. eto nakasupot.‖ Cge.‖ ―Pahingi nga. Iinumin na. that is the difference between an impossible crime with the use of inadequate means and attempted or frustrated homicide. salamat. eto nagkamali si ma‘am. Nilinis pa. be careful ha. But then. She went home and placed the cyanide in a small container. titignan muna. Hindi pwede pumatay kahit anong gawin mo dun sa husband—ihalo mo man sa pagkain niya. kukunin nun yung kutsara. itatapon na ganun. ―Ay naku. Pero yung baril. Alright. bakit nalipat dito? Ang nalagay ko doon sa cape. You should understand. galit dun sa husband. sobra na. sinalin na niya. She doesn‘t know that their maid was (shall we call it) not yet sleepy at the time. Okay lang yan. ―Ano kaya ang nangyari?‖ So. Let‘s say again the wife. sasandukin na ganun kasama yung konting kape. Sa umaga. . Alam niyo ba yung istorya nun? (sir. gave out a laugh J) Pag-Ilocano daw. bukas na yan patay na yan. After working the whole day. tsaka Ilocano. coffee mate‖. para bukas alam ko ang kinalalagyan. ito yun ah…bakit nagkapalit? Eh coffee mate yung nandito.‖ The man continued drinking the coffee. The woman is expecting the husband to drop dead. meron ka pa bang cyanide? Kelangan ng mister ko eh. she is entitled for a penalty one degree lower from the penalty imposed by law. Are you . But then it shall recommend in the Office of the President thru the DOJ that the same be the subject of legislation. We don‘t have any problem anymore. But there are times when an act may be repressed etc. Going back. And all of us knows that in cases of life imprisonment. no problem.titignan yung bangaw. of course. she got into wrong company. reclusion temporal. Its only on impossible crimes. papagpagin pa. The rule with respect to these impossible crimes. Sayang. Meaning to say. RPC The fifth article is about the duty of the courts. Lumaki ng konti yung tiyan. Of course. A court has the duty of deciding the case even if there appears to be no law which has been violated etc. In the event of (shall we call it) that the court finds that the act is reprehensible etc. (hehehe J) kasi maraming nainom. piniga pa. but some people usually do not want them to be the subject of legislation. in the company of illegal recruiters and she went on her own until her conviction. (4B and sir got hysterical J) Its just a joke among friends when we were still college students. having to turn them as prision correccional. that the President should certify the same as urgent. All other penalties wherein the penalties are in years. the last paragraph…oh. there is no penalty lower by one degree. and that there is no need to repress the same and there is a need to have the same be punished but there is no law punishing it. But in Article 4 ha. prision mayor. That is on my father side. the court should impose the proper penalty but the court may recommend to the Office of the President either for commutation of sentence. The President should only certify urgent bills di ba. Because I have some classmates from Bohol. But the problem is that the penalty imposable for such an offense is life imprisonment. or for a legislation to be passed in order that the penalty be lowered.nagsama yung dalawang kuripot. Those that impose cruel or unusual punishments etc. the court should also decide. old. therefore. Naku. Then. The court should not refuse to decide the case. they are from Batangas. Ilocano. I think Article 5 miss the point. never mind. ARTICLE 5. So. Itinapon…yun. something is wrong there. She tried to invoke the mitigating circumstance of minority because she claims that at the time that she committed the crime she was only 17. And on my mother‘s side. I think that you have understood the whole thing about impossible crimes. my roots is from Ilocos accdg to my having traced my roots for about 8 years. months. from Batangas. we have Article 5. etc. What is Article 4. well probably this is urgent. Tsaka ininom. Just like the case of a young woman who (shall we call it) was charged and convicted of illegal recruitment in a large scale at the time she committed the crime she was only 17 yrs. there is no penalty lower by one degree. RA 8043. You will be surprised dahil matagal nyo nang kinukuha ito. But. Sentenced her to life imprisonment but in the last portion in the dispositive portion. actually some of them are lawyers. There is something wrong there. You know what happened there in that particular case.taking up now Civil Law Review? (4B: Yes) Look at the law on inter-country adoption. But there is no such penalty that can be imposed…2 degrees lower? Wala namang degrees yan eh. What are the penalties in violation of the provisions in the Inter-Country Adoption. shall be punished with a penalty of IMPRISONMENT RANGING FROM SIX (6) YEARS AND ONE (1) DAY TO TWELVE (12) YEARS AND/OR FINE OF NOT LESS THAN FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50.) ―Any person who shall violate established regulations relating to the confidentiality and integrity of the records…etc…. it is hereby recommended to the Office of the President of the Republic of the .‖ Etc… b. The SC still convicted the girl. See how I can remember. in violation of the provisions of this Act. that is ignorance of the law. ordinary judge. Kaya nagkakabuhol-buhol itong ating sociedad eh. Quoting from Section 16: a. the SC said. but they did not use their knowledge of the law. it was approved by Ramos. Kung judge. But then the people who passed the same in Congress.000).‖ Could there be two degrees lower from a specific penalty of 6 years and 1 day to 12 years? WALA.) ―Any person who shall knowingly participate in the conduct or carrying out of an illegal adoption. That does not apply to them. Mali yan. sana he knows also criminal law so that he can explain that to you. shall suffer the penalty of IMPRISONMENT RANGING FROM ONE (1) YEAR AND ONE (1) DAY TO TWO (2) YEARS…etc…‖ But look at the second pgh of letter B: ―A penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that prescribed for the consummated felony under this Article shall be imposed upon the principal s of the attempt to commit any of the acts herein enumerated. Who authored that law? What I know. this pgh is useless. Congress…you cannot say that they are ignorant of the law. inapply niya. I am sure there is no such kind of penalty in our criminal justice system. Mali yan. it‘s an absolutory cause even if you invert your book…wala. Even our laws… ah. There is no penalty for attempted violations of that particular law. do you have a copy? If my recollection serves me right. I believe its in your Civ Rev. So. You ask your prof in (shall we call it) CivRev. There are also crimes which do not have complete stages. nag-end na naman ang tape pero lapit na mag-end yung discussion…Sorry. there are cruel and unusual punishments there. you want to hit a person with your fist. it is always consummated. So. she might be 27 years old when she reached the Bureau of Corrections.Phils. oral defamation—these are formal crimes. She might have been 18 at the time that she was convicted. They can apply Article 5 because for them it is cruel to the young person she is only 17 at the time of the commission of the crime. that the penalty of life imprisonment imposed upon the accused be commuted to…and they even specified…an indeterminate penalty of 10 years and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months. there is no frustrated stage. If you look at RA 9165. There are only two stages and these are only attempted and consummated. There are other cruel and unusual punishments that our laws have actually imposed. What is worst is if you are a candidate for public office… (Naku. These are called Formal Crimes.J) ~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: JUNE 30. then you missed…attempted slight physical injuries? Acts of lasciviousness. I want you to be aware that there are crimes or felonies that by their very nature do not have any stage except for being consummated. And the penalty would be life imprisonment to death. You all know that rape. still . 2003 Monday STAGES OF A FELONY… Before I discuss the stages of a felony. Even those who are possessing only of chemical ingredients etc. unjust vexation. Examples of which are physical injuries. There is no attempted stage. there is already a presumption that you intend to manufacture metamphetamine hydrochloride or other drugs etc. And maybe when the SC decided.. You want to tell me. despite the fact that it was transferred from crimes against chastity to crimes against persons. there is no attempted physical injury. she might be 20. I will just discuss to you different crimes and the application of the stages of the commission of the crime. if the taking of a personal property with intent to gain and without the consent of the owner took place in an enclosed establishment of which the person who enters will be inspected and again inspected when he leaves the premises for that he is under close monitoring by the people thereat. If you will recall. It is either attempted or consummated. But when the person who took the personal property . …AND ITS APPPLICATION I will not dwell any more on the definitions of attempted. in the crime of arson. the determination of whether the taking of personal property inside that place with intent to gain and without the consent of the owner should be considered either an attempted. Say for example. The mere discoloring by reason of fire of any part of a building shall be considered as consummated arson. According to the decision in that particular case. The application of the three stages of the commission of the crime in the crimes of theft or qualified theft or robbery is different from the application of the three stages of the crime in the event that there is an intent to kill a person. frustrated or consummated theft. you will be misled in some of the cases there in to believing that in the event that a person took personal properties inside an enclosed establishment. those cases that were cited in the books of Gregorio. it may be consummated. frustrated or consummated. Even the sexual assault. Let us put it this way. the crime committed is only attempted theft or qualified theft. it would admit of situational stages in order that we will be able to determine whether a theft if attempted. Likewise. What makes the crime of theft peculiar? Because in the crime of theft. it does not have any frustrated stage. The moment that that person lay hand on any property with intent to gain already and he was apprehended when he was not yet leaving the premises. Faylona and other books – the old ones. in several cases decided by the SC. I have been disagreeing with the comment there because the whole decision was not read altogether.maintain its two stages—attempted stage and consummated stage. the crime of rape is committed in an enclosed establishment of which any person who enters the same and who leaves the same will be subjected to inspection. say for example. there is no frustrated stage because it adopts the principles of rape. about the guards who intercepted a truck loaded with linens and that they were able to apprehend the driver of the truck. in one of the cases that was cited in the book of Kapunan and Faylona (?) or whoever it was and in the book of Gregorio etc. if my recollection serves me right. the crime committed is consummated theft as what was frustrated only is the actual benefit that this people will derive from the crime. If. frustrated and consummated. It is also supposed to be different when it comes to rape. tried to leave the premises believing that he will not be noticed by the guard or believing that he can get away with it. who are you going to blame? You. That is the case that I told you about the theft of the linens in a hospital…it is actually frustrated theft. di ba?) It‘s good that we are still landing in the top ten. Of course. there is intent to gain. he has already taken full possession of the property and he has the opportunity and. even if the person is still within the premises if he has the opportunity of disposing of the property. some of you are always there at Powerplant. but also complete and juridical possession of the property. he was able to notice the personal properties being spirited away by the offender and that the offender was apprehended before he leaves the premises. That is why the crime that has been committed is only attempted theft. If he was able to run and he has already the opportunity to dispose of the property but you were faster than him that you overtook him and caught him. the crime committed is already consummated. Because he is still within reached that is why were able to grab his hand. You remember the customs personnel who in a roll of belts. It is different in an enclosed place where no inspection of the person that are coming in and out is being done. Say for example. took one and placed it inside his drawer. There is also already ―without the consent of the owner‖ then it is already consummated theft. no more because of the Powerplant (What????!!!! That‘s not true. How about in open spaces? In open spaces. he did in fact tried to leave the premises. not only temporary possession. the crime committed is only frustrated theft. What are you doing there? Why don‘t you use the library? It used to be when we were still in Salcedo. The answer is NO. the students are very very serious about their study. he threw the personal property over the window knowing for a fact that a friend or somebody will pick it up and that it would be turned over to him. Okay. What crime is committed? CONSUMMATED THEFT. you are there. let us say for example that somebody picked your wallet. Almost every afternoon before going to class. Here. in fact. Because at that time. there was an opportunity on his part to dispose of the property. yourself. But because of the alertness of the clerk. It will become frustrated only if there are causes independent of the will of the perpetrator that prevented the consummation of the crime. somebody noticed him and then he was arrested. Say for example. I will give you an example that is an experience of . The person has already in his hands your wallet but you noticed it so immediately grabbed the hands of the thief. Consummated…yes. What crime is committed? Is it attempted theft or frustrated theft? The issue there that must be resolved is whether he has complete possession of the property to your exclusion. That is a correct decision because he has already taken. in open spaces. it is actually the fact of complete control or temporary control over the property or temporary possession or complete possession of the property that will determine whether the crime committed is attempted or consummated. Supposing we do not land in the top ten anymore. then that would be consummated theft. he is inside the premises. It is consummated. a probinsyano or a promdi. The moment he broke open a receptacle and took out the contents. there will not harm people etc. it would be different. he was still placing those things inside his bag when you grabbed him. Wag mong pagtitiwalaan kahit sino kahit katabi mo. it is already CONSUMMATED ROBBERY. he destroyed the door and the lock…ah. The moment he lays his hand on any of those properties. ―O. The moment that force. You were there acting like a guard of an enclosed place and you were able to apprehend a person who has already taken possession of your property but what was not able to fully take the same away due to cause or causes independent of his will. You will never be lost because just try to find out that he have complete physical possession of the property to the exclusion of . What crime is committed? IS it attempted or frustrated or consummated? It‘s frustrated because the cause or causes that is independent of the will of the thief is the string connected to the wallet that prevented him from consummating the crime of theft. ―May I have your wallet please. --in evasion of service of sentence that is unlawful entry this is what they have been saying but actually what is being committed by the thief is ‗climbing the walls‘ escalamiento and it is only after climbing the wall when he commit unlawful entry. violence or intimidation is employed upon a person and that the offender was able to get hold of the property that is already consummated whether the person was apprehended inside or outside of any enclosed premises. he suddenly turned around and saw a person with his wallet. they will just surreptitiously climbed the walls etc. for example you find him with the properties already in his hands or in his bags and his was about to jump out the window but you where able to get hold of his shirt or his pants and he was not able to leave.‖ The father got almost an invisible strin g but those that are being used by fishermen and he patched a hole at the edge of the wallet. He tied the string and said. He was able to grab the theft. ―Son. that is in an open space. You know the ―akyat-bahay‖. that is already consummated. What crime did he commit? Consummated? No…it is frustrated because you are the owner of the house and you have the duty to guard your property.. if you‘re going out you‘ll just tie the other end of the string on your belt. Baka may magnanakaw dyan. The application of all these principles is just as simple as that. IN ROBBERY it is different. You see. But that person is having a hard time of running away because of the string attached to the wallet. But supposing he was inside the room. violence or intimidation upon persons but it would be different if it is force upon things. What crime is committed? ATTEMPTED THEFT.‖ But then the father went even farther. Most of the promdis are being taught by their parents to be careful here in Metro Manila. Say. anak mag-iingat ka. supposing.‖ The son was an obedient one so when he felt a ta g at his belt. Now. Because there is force. you ought not to be paid with your salaries and you can‘t borrow anything from me. His workers asked him that they be paid already of their salaries and that they also would like to ask for advances or ‗bale‘. A foreigner has some workers in his fishpond. When the foreigner was in the veranda seating in a wooden chair. Calalo which was decided by the CA only. Bolinaga served the sentence. The lesson there that you should keep in mind. i. The foreigner refused. In cases of crimes where there is an intent to kill.. the presence of the wooden chair at the back. Calalo. Bolinaga surreptitiously approached the foreigner and with a sharp bladed weapon stabbed the foreigner. But then the prosecutor charged Bolinaga of frustrated murder. if the wound inflicted is a mortal wound which would have caused the death of the victim if not for the timely medical assistance that was given to the victim or because of the strong resistance of the victim to such kind of force or that the person has a strong body or whatever. instead of hitting the foreigner. he has taken possession of the property. U should be guided by the cases of People v. it is not necessary that he has the opportunity to dispose. These are simple reminders to you. The first case happened somewhere in the Visayan region. MURDER. ―ang tamad-tamad nyo. So. you‘re not doing anything. If it is THEFT.e. PARRICIDE etc…ATTEMPTED or CONSUMMATED. a window. If it is ROBBERY. The CA said under the circumstance. hit the back of the chair. Bolinaga was convicted by the trial court. the moment he has employed force. hit the back of the chair. So. he did not die then that is . after a whi le. Meaning that the knife instead of hitting the victim. How about FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE. believing that his people have already but Bolinaga and company just stayed nearby. Bolinaga and People v. You are lazy. violence or intimidation of the person and was able to get the property of that person…that is already CONSUMMATED even if he was immediately apprehended. the moment that he has already broken a door.‖ So. considering that the victim did not suffer any fatal injury That would have caused his death then the committed should only be attempted. he must have complete possession to the exclusion of others with the opportunity to dispose in the event that it is consummated. But thereafter came the case of Calalo and the Court of Appeals disagreed with the SC. nothing happened to the foreigner. It was affirmed by the SC. Claiming that all the acts of execution necessary for the consummation of the crime are present and that it was not only consummated because of causes or a cause independent of the will of Bolinaga. But the bladed instrument.others. It was followed by several decisions of the SC citing the case of People v. etc. Sometimes. it might not even cause death sometimes. If you will recall it around year 2000. If its not directed to a vital part of the body. and I do not know if I told you about the case of People v. attempted murder. It used to be that our concept of consummated rape is that the mere touching of the male organ on the labia of the pudendum of the women is already consummated rape.‖ Let me explain the other disquisition of Justice Bellosillo in that particular case. But then. Campungan. That is what you have read. If I remembered correctly. But then Justice Bellosillo added some conditions. some of you in CRIM 2. it must also be directed to a vital part of the body. But if there is already of a bombardment of the drawbridge. frustrated homicide. And you will know that even if the victim is not hit as long as there is an act that was committed by the offender which tends to achieve his purpose and he commences the acts of execution but nevertheless he was not able to complete the same and it is not by reason of his own spontaneous resistance. Campungan is the new jurisprudence when it comes to what is attempted and what is consummated rape. that is already consummated rape. probably Justice Bellosillo became-how do you call it--interested in the use of the acts being committed at that time by the people engaged in hostilities. Say. ―If there is only a shelling of the castle of passion. the intention to kill may be deduced from the force that was employed. It is that it is simply a sexual perversion. Not yet? The case of People v. he said it in this wise. even if the wound is serious. In cases of RAPE what is the new developments aside from the addition of some means of committing the rape and addition of some acts that is considered as rape such as marital rape and sexual assault. there you are. You can see already the picture that is drawn for you to know what is attempted homicide.when it is frustrated. So. It was Justice Bellosillo who penned the decision and it was penned during hostilities taking place between the army and the MILF in the Camp Abubakar. you used a gun. You were my students. it will only become attempted. Nobody will believe you because if the person is hit whether or not you have the intention of killing him there is already almost an absolute presumption that intent to kill is present. But sexual assault is not actually rape. I intend to scare him only…hindi tama ‗yun. It is still not frustrated homicide or murder. They are so easy to remember. aside from the wound being a serious one. Sometimes you can convince the court that there is not intent to kill depending upon the circumstances. Now. that is only attempted rape. how did he use those terms. that is correct. It is very easy. He actually used some terms which are only used in acts of hostilities or in acts of war. then it is considered as an attempted homicide or murder. So. frustrated murder. In order that a crime of rape may be . the male organ must be capable of penetration. the penetration was by an erect male organ. We have abandoned the previous rulings. But then. And every citizen in his town knows that he is safe company for women. of course. that is why we coined the case as the case of the ‗limp syndrome‘. the victim admitted. he undressed the woman and went on top of the woman. The lower court in its decision has the girl testified that although the male organ was limp. In one case.‖ The lesson is that in order that rape may be consummated. then he was immobilized by some persons. Are there questions that you‘d like to ask? . there is an erect male organ capable of penetrating the labia of the pudendum of a woman and that.consummated there should not only be the touching of the male organ on the labia of the pudendum of a woman. there could be no consummated rape. in ARSON. The SC did not even convict the man of either attempted rape. the male organ is always a question mark (hahahaJ). The SC totally acquitted the man. The mere fact that a part of a building changed color by reason of a fire that is already consummated. the man was already lighting a piece of cloth dressed with gasoline. Under the circumstances. climbed the house of the woman. Justice Bellosillo in his ponencia said that in order that the rape may be consummated. And even went on further by saying that there could have been a slightest penetration. Be careful ha. A man obsessed with the woman. AS I said. herself. He is already in the SCRA. you will be surprised at the ending. hindi ka na pwede. It all started in the case of Campungan adopted by several cases which came after that citing such case. acts of lasciviousness or even unjust vexation. Maybe not out of pity…(hahahaJ)…but then probably the SC is satisfied that the man has already met the penalty that he deserves. no matter what the man did he could not have an erection. IN other words. especially the woman. It was the testimony however of the woman that when the man was trying to have carnal knowledge of her. there must be at least even a slightest penetration. That is rape. there is the slightest penetration of the same then it is considered as consummated. the crime that he committed was attempted arson. But not only that. Probably you will laugh at this but this is true. it kept on touching and brushing the labia of her pudendum. Now. (hahahaJ) That whenever he passed by. that the male organ is not capable of penetration and therefore. there is no problem. went to her room while the woman is half asleep. ―Pedro. You are smiling…but there was another case decided also by Justice Bellosilo. That is actually the jist of the decisions of the SC. in 9165. they are all liable and the penalty for one shall be the same penalty imposed on the other including the lookouts. Came to know that he keeps money. mere conspiracy by itself is not punishable unless there is a specific law defining and punishing it. Dito sa Pasong Tamo ba yun. of course. If the offenders agree to commit the robbery with force or violence or intimidation upon persons or if they agreed to commit robbery in a place which is inhabited and that on occasion thereof. After they were finished with their contract. ―Tapos na naman tayo eh. But actually in the case of Jinggoy Estrada v. NO questions. Sandiganbayan. It is always consummated. In my view. ways. I remember that coz I was the one who decided it in the lower court. Let us go to that first. there might be three kinds. Conspiracy as a means of committing the crime. You remember the Macalino exchange cars or whatever. Even if one who became a lookout did not participate in the killing. There are two types of conspiracies. coup de etat. let‘s rob the place. they came to know that he has valuable properties inside. That is the case of People v. death occurred perpetrated by one or more of the offenders. The conspiracy that we all know is the agreement between two or more persons to commit the crime.Is there ATTMEPTED ESTAFA? WALA. these two people who are both from Tondo came to know what is inside his house. We all know that the ‗act of one is the act of all‘. rebellion. conspiracy to violate such shall merit the same penalty as if the act has been consummated. Look how drastic is the law. The maid knows us. He has a house just nearby. I have a copy here. but if you include conspiracies under RA 9165. In the complex crime of robbery with homicide. the offenders may agree to commit robbery in diff. Robles. (heheheJ). We will just tell the maid that we left some . is the mere fact that two or more persons conspired and confederated with each other to commit of robbery. Conspiracy to commit treason. Do you recall that case? Some of you were my students in Crim 2 noh. But then. sedition and. such as what? There are four conspiracies that we know. But there are instances where such principle is not applicable. the ‗act of one is the act of all‘ and the penalty to be imposed to one shall be the same penalty to be imposed upon the other? That is your belief probably. there are five. conspiracy to commit any of the provisions under RA 9165. CONSPIRACY Let us go to conspiracies and proposals. the two get an idea. He had it painted by two painter. Its good if everybody understood what I‘m saying here. So. But you will find out that if you are just going to examine closely the laws—in ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE. Therefore. Would it change the decision of the SC? And going further. They were so suspicious because no owner of any electrical equipment will allow the wires of such to dangle from the compartment of the car. he was the lookout and claims that I did not agree in the killing of the maid. But let us change the facts a little. ―Okay lang basta hati hati tayo sa makukuha. eto na nga…huli! The two were convicted and they did not appeal.‖ So. ―Oh. It was the testimony of the two policemen that they became suspicious. They looked around and saw a mobile near them and the policemen were looking at them. (ulk!) So. What I did agree on is only in committing the robbery so I should be sentenced for the crime of robbery and not for the complex crime of robbery with homicide. walang dugo yun.‖ ―O sige. IN their hurry. after closing the door of the compartment. They passed by Delpan Bridge but there was a traffic jam at the time.of our tools inside and we are gonna get it. supposing that what was agreed upon was to rob the place after the maid has left. The maid suffered more than 12 stab wounds with the use of screwdrivers. The problem is that after ransacking the place. Immediately after entrance. supposing that the house .‖ And they know that Macalino leaves his house at exactly 8 o‘clock min the morning so it was after 8 that they went in to the house because all the other members of the family had left for work. Ah. They invited Robles who is a gang mate. Robles posted himself in a nearby sari-sari store as a lookout so he will give the sign if and when a patrol car came along or a barangay ‗tagay‘ passed by the place. So. Robles said. approached the taxicab and offered the driver to go down from the taxicab and walk some distance away. And you know that you have to employ either force. It was only Robles who appealed. The penalties that were imposed upon the two should also be imposed upon you. when you agreed to rob a place which is inhabited. you know that there will be a resistance. When they went there. The two who were seated at the back are even carrying on their lap some properties. Ang nandun lang maid. We are just going to get them. When they returned to their mobile car. Wala nang magagawa yun. they heard from the radio that there was a robbery that took place in Makati and that the maid was killed. these people will turn their head. they did not notice that some of the wires from the electrical equipments are dangling from the compartment. the two were met by the maid. not messy ha. you are equally responsible. lolooban natin yung bahay dun. The SC said. para yung icepick. And asked these people to got down from the taxicab and put them under arrest. they loaded all the things that they took in the house including money. they started to stab her. When the maid turned her back. kunin niyo. Robles hailed a taxicab. they did was to go down from the mobile car. The taxi driver was asked. what do you want?‖ ―We left some tools inside. Because whenever they look at the faces of these three people. violence or intimidation upon persons. ―Pare. where did you pick this people up…Makati ho ganitong street. There is not much blood that will come out. any act of the others that resulted to the death of the victim by reason of the employment of violence. But if the premises has already been declared as uninhabited. Esp that I just came from a lecture in Mindanao. The mere allegation of the fact that they have agreed and conspired and confederated to commit such an act is enough because it is only a means. it became an inhabited house and at the time when these people decided to rob the house. dun sa kanila hindi eh. you see how these particular conspiracies evolve. otherwise. I don‘t know if you have understood that in the reading of your book. If you are going to decide on the two subsequent examples that I gave. they do not know that a vagrant was loitering in the premises and they killed the vagrant in order that there will be no witness to the commission of the crime but one of them is a look-out and that he did not even had a knowledge about the killing of the vagrant. you look at Article 202. common lang dun yun noh. the look-out cannot be held criminally liable of the complex crime of robbery with homicide. any person who inhabits or who loiters in uninhabited places without any means of subsistence is a vagrant and that person is even violating the law. There are so many checkpoints but what surprises me is that CRV. Mukha yatang gusto niyo mag-recitation ha. Crosswind. the offender will be deprived of his right to be informed of the nature of the accusation against him. even if the decision was to rob the place after the maid has left the place. Who is from Iligan here? Who is from Marawi? Who is from Cagayan de oro? Yun. Pampasahero lang nila yung mga Crosswind dun tsaka Adventure. Now. You‘re from Cagayan de Oro? Its about more than 1 hour and 40 mins by car to Iligan noh. Araw -araw naman sana magbabasa kayo. and it so happens that there is a vagrant.has been abandoned for more than a week. yun. the ‗act of one is the act of all‘ and the penalty of one is the penalty for all even if one of them did not agree to the killing of any person who may be present in the premises. Mahirap maglecture ba for four hours. For two days. would the decision in the first be the same decision in the second and the third? The decision in the first would be applicable only to the second circumstance because in the 2nd circumstance. each and every detail that would constitute the conspiracy must be stated in the information. But when it is a crime when the conspiracy itself is a crime. there is no assurance that the maid would not return and if anyone was killed on occasion or during the course of robbery. He will only be liable for simple robbery. RAV4. In conspiracy also as a means to commit a crime…remember this ha…it is not essential nor necessary that each and every detail of the conspiracy or the act which these people have arrived at as the means to commit a crime to be reflected in the information. I just form Iligan at about 10 am. But there are still so many tanks along the highway. Dito sa atin luxury na. I have been lecturing for more than 20 hours. I arrived only this morning. Have you been going to Cagayan De Oro lately?—(addressed to Kathy P. Only those who directly participated in the commission of the robbery shall be meted out for the penalty of the complex crime.)—―I have not been traveling to any . In the case of Jose ―Jinggoy‖ Estrada v. I did something wrong…I should suffer for it in the meantime. Sandiganbayan. if you . there is what we call a ―wheel or a circle conspiracy or radial conspiracy‖. Siya ba kumita ng napakalaki dun? But then they have not decided his petition for bail kasi nagpahuli siya eh. alam na nyo ang mangyayari sa inyo. You might know each other. Although you did not know who is the next person to you. Are you familiar with a wheel or a radial conspiracy? Kasama ito sa bar ah. Serapio. So…remember this particular case and remember the term—wheel or circle conspiracy and the chain conspiracy. say. you are my right hand woman. its rather tiresome to travel for about two hours and wake up at about 3am. yun ang hub==dealing individually with two or more persons or groups and these two or more persons or groups are disposed. eto ang 50 kilos bahala ka na dyan…ik alat mo sa mga bata natin. in the American jurisdiction.) the chain conspiracy which is usual in drugs cases particularly in the distribution thereof. the presence of several accused in multiple conspiracies commonly involves two structures. Baka biglang ibigay ito. 1. just like a flagellant. And 2. one person is actually considered as a spaw (?) he will contribute but he does not know who the others are who will contribute in order to accumulate a certain amount of money. 2002. it is in the back of his mind. Utos ni Big Boss ito. But then there are how many lawyers and law firms who are guilty of such an act sometimes more than what Serapio did. Probably that is what is in his mind at this point. Look at what happened to Serapio…kay Atty. Was there any allegation that he accepted any money? It was the foundation which accepted the money.) the wheel or circle conspiracy in which there is a single person or group known as the ―hub‖==yun bang pinapasukan mo ng wheel tapos tinuturnilyuhan mo yun. sometimes it is always there at the back of his mind. there is still a chain conspiracy. it is quite questionable noh. Parusahan ko muna ang sarili ko to cleanse myself for whatever wrong I have done before I go out and join the society where I belong. Otherwise. But I said having came from a catholic University. it is different. I think that is what Serapio is doing to himself. 26. You know having came from a Catholic University. you get your percentage. IN the wheel conspiracy. Go to Cagayan de Oro to catch the 7:40 flight form Manila by car…wow. But if you will be able to bring all the money.‖ Well. Ipagpalagay na na may kasalanan yun pero hindi ganun kabigat. sayo itong 1 kilo…bahala na kayo sa mga bata natin then on a particular day dalhin niyo dito ang napagbentahan niyo. So.nearby town. because the decision is Feb. what you are going to do is call all this people. As a matter of fact. That is now the wheel and the chain conspiracy. It says here. That is what happened in the case of Erap. Had he actually filed his petition ahead of Jinggoy. I am the distributor. he will be out in a jiffy coz he is the less guilty. Article 10 says that the provisions of the RPC shall have suppletory effect to any and all special penal laws that may be existing or that may have been passed in the future unless such special law provides otherwise. The most recent cases that Article 10 was applied by the SC was in the cases of People v. De Guzman. That‘s 377 SCRA. or felonies committed under the RPC. prision mayor and so forth and so on. questions? ARTICLE 10 All right. then the offense object meaning the crime. DO you know how? Do you know that the provisions of the RPC is very clear that the penalties would be arresto menor. But for a specific special law. that one of them is that there must be a specific allegation as the agreement. People v. These are the 3 so I suggest that you read this case as it would enhance your knowledge in the subject of conspiracy. the penalty that should be imposed cannot be lowered by one degree to get the minimum. Because the law says the minimum penalty shall be the penalty which has been fixed by law and the maximum cannot exceed the maximum fixed by law. . Of course. Neither are those who committed violations of the laws of the security of the state or laws against humanity or the law of nations. If that penalty id used in a special law. towards which the agreement was directed. Martin Simon. which is intended to be committed. the suppletory character of the RPC cannot be applicable if the accused is a habitual delinquent because a habitual delinquent is not entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. arresto mayor. conspiracy unless you have some questions…NO. prision correccional. the minimum penalty shall be one degree lower from the possible penalty after considering the presence or absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. The SC said. So. the privilege being given to those who may be convicted of that special law shall be the same privilege that were given to those who violated the RPC particularly in the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law and if you apply the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Robin Padilla and People v.are going to look at this. It‘s very easy if you would just be able to know how to correlate all this there will be no problem in Criminal Law. you will note that the requirement for the indictment of conspiracy were even enumerated by the SC and there are 3 requirements for the indictment of a conspiracy. and the overt acts that were performed in furtherance of the agreement. Because the provisions of the RPC and the indeterminate sentence law were applied to them and therefore because they are favorable to said persons thus the provisions of the RPC has a suppletory effect. That is what I am afraid. Pero lumabas lang yun ngayon lang. the provisions of the RPC shall apply to minors. do not rely so much on the lecture. marami yan. instead of being sentenced to life imprisonment to death. 2002. Is that provision correct? First. it prohibited to sentence a minor to death.I don‘t see any other problem with respect to Art. Don‘ rely on me talking here for two hours. As you all know. trying to find out on how I could reconcile them. That is the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. I have been trying to go around both laws. Mamya maliin ko pa yan eh…(ngek. I said the one who did this must be somebody who knows. It‘s only about 15 mins to 8 but then I would rather start justifying circumstances on Wednesday. I said this is good. in the Admin Matter promulgated by the Supreme Court on April 15. If you have a copy of the law. in other words. But the provisions in the Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (JICL) may ran counter with some provisions in RA 9165. Most probably in a week or so. he should be sentenced to reclusion perpetua to death. But the good thing about this is that it is an exception. Do not wait until the exams before you read your book. Have you read that? Siguro si Sedfrey. Meaning privilege mitigating circumstance. I never knew that there is such an animal. oh no!) So. But this lawyers did not realize that under the Constitution and even under our statutes. Paghalo-haluin mo yun hindi aabot sa reclusion perpetua yun. Minor yan eh. You will find there the provision that the provisions of the RPC shall have NO suppletory effect to the provisions of RA9165 or the provisions of the RPC is not applicable —what is the term that they used? No one has a copy of 9165? Yun ang nakalagay dun…Not applicable except to a minor who have been found to have committed a violation of a provision of RA 9165.) sec. I still need time. there is something only that is wrong there but it‘s purpose is good and laudable because it accepts the fact that minors should be treated differently from adults. I was impressed. voluntary surrender. he will never know how to do it. Barbers did not do it himself. no comment tayo si Sedfrey kasi eh. 10 except 1. I obtained a copy only two months ago. regarding Juveniles in Conflict with the Law and I know that you already have an idea regarding that particular Administrative matter. Reading it. Marami yan so that particular section. hanggang reclusion temporal lang yun. But then when I read it. Kelan ninyo kinuha yan? Last sem? Elective? Sa amin kailan lang inilabas yan eh. mali eh. siya may gawa nun noh? Part…well. mitigating circumstance of plea of guilty.98 of RA 9165. Okay. Can you sentence a minor to death? Hindi nag-iisip eh…(heheheJ) ewan ko. . I will be able to do it. He needs the services of good lawyers. baka magkamali din ako in the future but I don‘t intend to be a politician but there are so many lawyers who were hired by them to draft the law. Read please read. Medyo pwede pang pumasok sa involuntary submission of a direct dependent to drug rehabilitation. they are: (1) Unlawful aggression . The justifying circumstances is based on. 2003 Article 11-Justifying Circumstance They are called justifying circumstances bec. But then if you are going to study the justifying circumstance of self-defense. We all know that a person believes that his life is as important. Thanks J DATE: JULY 2. His right to existence. the right of strangers to their lives. Also. that is. the right of his relatives to their life. honor or property. property. While it may be true that injuries or death even or destruction of property may have been caused by a person yet the person is justified in doing so except in pgh 4 of Article 11. you will note that there are 3 requisites. SELF-DEFENSE Self-defense actually emanated from the natural right of the person from selfpreservation. sometimes. the person performing the act did not violate any law and if he violated any norm of conduct. honor.Disclaimer: The title of the cases mentioned may not appear to be the exact name so please be responsible in finding the correct one. the right of a person to his life. There is no criminal in the justifying circumstance and also there is no crime that was committed. the avoidance of a greater evil or injury. he believes is paramount to the right of the other to exist. if not more important than the lives of others. he is justified in doing so. You will note that in defense of relatives and defense of strangers. they are not the same as that of self-defense. I. Which must come from the victim. Meaning to say the person who has been injured or who may have suffered death or other misfortune by reason of another person having to defend himself; (2) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the attack; (3) Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. (1) Unlawful aggression usually is an act which put another persons life in peril or in imminent danger or if not the honor of that person or his property, coupled with any danger to the life of the holder of the property. There are several theories in relation to unlawful aggression. But the fact is that unlawful aggression does not necessarily mean that the life of the person must be in peril bec. that is only applicable when the person is defending his life. There are instances where unlawful aggression may be committed against the other but the unlawful aggression is directed towards the property of another; towards the honor of another; towards the chastity of another and therefore that person to whom the unlawful aggression is directed has the right to repel that unlawful aggression by the means as aforestated in requisite no. 2. There have been some cases that some readers of law sometimes commit a mistake, particularly in regard to acts that may be considered as unlawful aggression under certain circumstances but in some circumstances may not. But definitely, certain acts are by themselves acts of unlawful aggression and there is no other condition that may be attached to it. Such as what? Well, if you slap the face of a person, naturally that is unlawful aggression. You spit at his face, that is unlawful aggression bec. the face of a person represents his dignity, his very being and therefore, it ought to be respected. Whether his face is that of a face which his mother could only love, that is not the point, the point is that you have to respect that particular person whether his face is not acceptable to you or not. One of the cited case in the book is about foot kicking. You have the impression that foot kicking is not unlawful aggression. That is not alltogether correct. You kick the foot of your enemy, that is unlawful aggression. You kick the foot of a stranger, that would be unlawful aggression. What the decision of the SC said which was not emphasized very well is that ―if it is a matter of greeting bet. 2 persons, then it is not considered as unlawful aggression. Most probably, they are horse trainers or jockeys. They deal with horses that is why they use their foot or feet to greet each other. That‘s only a joke. But some people could have some kind of greeting that they usually adopt that would make the other know of his presence. For example, a person suddenly slapping your nape and when you turn around you see that it is your friend. But it is a way of greeting you which both of you has adopted throughout the years. That is no unlawful aggression there. But you do it to an enemy or stranger, that is unlawful aggression. Now, with respect to crimes of oral defamation or libel. The moment that in oral defamation, you uttered words that are supposed to put the person into a disrepute, to humiliate him, to put him in an embarrassing position to the public or to those who may be present, if it is oral, then that is already unlawful aggression and the person has the right to defend himself from that unlawful aggression. In libel, the case is supposed to be by publication by writing or through radio or television. You may even also write libelous article against the person who wrote imputing upon you the commission of a crime, vice or defect, that is libel. The problem is if you do not have a newspaper of your own or if you are not a columnist, how will you be able to defend yourself. You cannot but your own newspaper. And if you ask the people in the newspaper, would they allow you to print what you want to say—sometimes yes, sometimes no. SO, you are always at a disadvantage, that is why there is a crime of libel. The act of unlawful aggression may be manifested by the outward manifestation of the intention of the person, usually. It is sometimes shown by not only his acts but by previous or simultaneous acts that were committed by that person. There are instances however that this unlawful aggressions may be committed by a person in a spur of a moment which sometimes, although deliberate yet it is not as serious as those that were planned, those that the offender has or the person who ahs committed the same has concocted or devised. You will recall that there have been unlawful aggressions that the SC has made the students of law realize that it can be committed at any case. For example, in the case of People v. Jaurigue, if you recall that case. She is a young lady who is the subject of amorous advances of a man. And that man has been pestering her, if not actually committing acts of lasciviousness against her if not vexing or annoying her. It is for that reason that she armed herself with a knife. So, she hid the knife in one of the pockets of her skirt and while in charge of the company of her father, this man seated beside her and in a few second the hands of the man started to travel until it reached the thigh of Jaurigue. And naturally, Jaurigue considered the same as unlawful aggression as it is already an act that would be offensive to her honor. She stabbed the man. The only issue which the SC resolved is whether the means employed is reasonable in order to repel or prevent the attack. But then, if we are going to consider that that is unlawful aggression, to my mind at this point, with the passage of RA 8353 and considering that the law provides about sexual assault and an opinion of a former Justice of the Court of Appeals, Justice Hilarion Aquino that even if what was inserted in the genitalia of a woman is the finger of the man, it is considered as sexual assault. Although I have a dissenting opinion to that. Should Jaurigue still wait until the man would be able to do what he intended at the time. So, she would be then within her right to defend her honor and the least that she can do under the circumstances was to stab the person. Would she wait until such time as the man accomplished what he intended to do…no way. They said that the police is there, the brgy lieutenant is there, the father of Jaurigue is there, but that is not the point. If you will recall in some of the cases decide by the SC, regarding rape, the SC convicted a person who was accused of raping his victim just beside the road fronting the city hall near the Japanese Garden at 6:30 in the evening. According to the SC, lust is not a respecter of time nor place nor even people and therefore it could take place anywhere at any time. At this point, if that would be the thinking of the SC, the case of Jaurigue would be abandoned and that an acquittal would be proper in the event that the same incident occurred to a young woman. (2) With respect to reasonable necessity of the means employed in order to repel or to prevent the attack. The leading case here is the case of Pp v. Jose Laurel Sr. That was the case of Exequel Castillo who has a girlfriend by the name of Concepcion Lat. They are from Batangas. As the Laurels are known for their mischievous conducts. In Batangas, they are called ―barako‖ or something to that effect. One time, Laurel, who is not even courting the girlfriend of Exequel Castillo kissed Concepcion Lat. Furious, Castillo has been asking emissaries to tell Laurel that he wanted to talk to him. Probably, Castillo is smarting (?) from the fact that Laurel was even ahead of him from kissing Concepcion Lat. Despite so many emissaries and people trying to patch up their differences, Laurel never did talk nor honor the invitation of Castillo. Until, during a party Laurel was forced to do so because he would look not anymore "barako" but a coward if he will not talk to Castillo. But the Batangueños are known for carrying their balisongs. On the other hand, the landed gents of Batangas are usually, in the event that they go to certain functions, are with canes. Not bec they are old but it was a sign of nobility at that time that they own vast tracts of land, etc. When he and Laurel met, there was a little altercation and Castillo hit Laurel with the rounded end of the cane. Laurel naturally fell. You know what they used for a cane during those days? It is carved out of ironwood. You can find that near the sea. Or if not the iron wood, the kamagong. Eh, ang bigat nun, tamaan ka nun, sigurado. So, Laurel fell and when he is down, he pulled his Batangas knife and stabbed Exequel Castillo twice. Castillo was hospitalized. He survived. The only issue there is, of course, as it is given that the unlawful aggression at that time was perpetuated by Exequel Castillo is (1) whether there is reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or prevent the attack and They rained blows on him until his eyebrow was hit and naturally he suffered a boxer‘s cut in the eyebrow. You know what is a boxer‘s cut. So. drove his car and took Roxas Blvd. He tried to enter his car and get his 38 snub-nose (?) revolver. dead. This is the case of a captain of a navy. he swerved his car to the right. reasonable necessity of the means employed. This gave the impression to the driver of the car at the rear that the captain. the Sc went to say that there is a reasonable necessity employed by Laurel in repelling or preventing the attack. Then. The place was steaming with people . opened his car and of course assaulted him. When he was able to get his gun. Tempers get the better of them with each other trying to outdo each other in the road. He does not know that there is another car was traveling at the rear portion of his car and supposed to use the right portion of the road. Maybe it could have been a vindication of a grave offense but they are not related to each other. there is. The problem is while he was on almost a stop position. The Sc even went further that the use of a cane is as lethal as the use of a knife and therefore there is no disparity with respect to the weapons. the car that was following him suddenly blocked his path. The provocation was directed to Concepcion and therefore there is actually lack of sufficient provocation on the part of Laurel. While traveling at Dewey Blvd. The captain slowed down and he was going towards that restaurant named Ling Nam. it was a provocation that was employed to Concepcion Lat. But you know. after briefing his men and it was already past 8 in the evening. There is a Ling Nam restaurant there di ba on the left side if you are traveling towards the south. the girlfriend of Exequel Castillo. is asking for a drag race. Two young men went down from their car. But the other side countered that if it is true that Laurel caused the provocation. he faced the two. therefore. Until they reached that aluminum tower in Baclaran. he was at the inner lane when he heard the sound of an explosion which he believes came from a gun but at that time it was December 19th so maybe some children or people are exploding some firearms etc. there is one case that might be of interest to you. going towards the direction of the south. And they are having an operation before Xmas somewhere in Malate as there are informations as they received about some people smuggling goods or smuggling aliens and there are other crimes being committed. You know at that place during that time there are so many uziseros. it has been argued by the prosecution that the cause of all the incident was Laurel who provoked the incident by kissing Concepcion Lat. Now. Blood dripped to his shirt and he became furious. which is now Roxas Blvd. shot one of them. it is not even a mitigating circumstance. He did not kiss Exequel Castillo but Concepcion Lat. This captain of the navy with the rank of colonel on the Armed Forces. So. with respect to lack of sufficient provocation on the part of Laurel. He was the head of the intelligence dept of the navy. they do not know him to be the captain of the navy.(2) was there lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. This two guys kept on delivering blows on him. Out of instinct. he presented evidence in his behalf and the court found that there is actually an incomplete self-defense bec there is no reasonable necessity of the means employed in using a firearm on the young man. He went to the CA. The only problem there is Sonny Parsons talk too much without asking proper advice from a lawyer. well. investigated and charged with homicide. So. the private complainant also went to the SC under Rule 65. He was not satisfied. she has that right. yet under certain instances the SC do. He is now serving sentence. He was then 60 years old at the time of sentenced. he was sentenced to an imprisonment ranging from 14 years 8 months and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months. They totally modified the decision of the lower court and sentenced the guy. There was no reason given by the SC in changing the facts as found by the lower court except that ―the lower court erred in appreciating the facts‖ that‘s all. Trained in hand to hand combat that with the two young people. But he wanted to make a last hirit. he went to the SC under Rule 45. I was intrigued by a question that was asked of me about the case of Sonny Parsons.at that time. There is no problem with that. The reason of the Court was that he is a graduate of the Phil Military Academy. The SC decided the case and you know what happened? The SC said that the findings of facts of the lower court is not correct. he can defend himself and a boxer‘s cut is not a serious injury that would merit the use of a firearm. And stole some of his properties. Actually. The aggressor is now the captain and the one who gave the provocation is the captain. Included in self-defense is. In defense of property. any woman has that right whether she is a prostitute or married or whatever. the minimum is about 2 months and 1 day. if course. Defense of Chastity. During the trial. that sometimes despite the time-honored principle that the SC is not supposed to disturb findings of facts by the lower court. So. So. the judgment was affirmed. it may turn out that there is none depending on the appreciation of the appellate courts but definitely the rule is still the same. If you were the lawyer of Sonny Parsons and he asked your advice in connection with the incident regarding the killing of two alleged robbers who even cooked food in his house. eat his food and he claimed that they tried to rape his daughter etc. It was in the decision. that was the decision. That the lower court erred in appreciating the facts and totally reversed the decision. even if you believe that there is actually unlawful aggression. defense of honor. But then the SC dismissed the petition of the private complainant under Rule 65 bec that was not the proper remedy. Police came he was arrested. But he was sentenced only of up to 2 years and 4 months of imprisonment. But he is not alone in the idea of going to the SC. What I am trying to tell is this. He keep on saying that he followed the jeep and when he saw that these people was on . Do you believe that self-defense is availing in the case of Sonny Parsons. when he followed this people. so that he can positively identify them in the event that they are brought to court. There is no incomplete self-defense there. With only a mitigating circumstance of immediate vindication of a grave offence. they already by means of force. he fired at them. ah you have to formulate your defense carefully. we all agree that in cases of defense of property. So. your liberty. he will be convicted. You can bring your gun. these people are again committing acts of aggression. If you would meet a client. If you were a victim of a robbery. when he saw them. but if he is going to phrase his defense this way. there is no need that the life of the owner is placed in imminent danger. So. It is enough that there is an assault. And when these people tried to go down from the jeep and knowing that they are armed and seeing at their weapons. if you have a gun. if he has no idea as to how they look. tell them what will be your defense. if it is true that he was the first one to fire the shot…he fired the shot to prevent the jeepney which they are riding from leaving and that is what was actually happening at that time. tell your client always not to go to media immediately. . Does he have to wait? No more because they have committed already a crime in his residence and they tried to rape his daughter. It is enough that there be unlawful aggression to the person of the owner or the possessor. took his properties etc and now while he was trying to recover them. Study very well bec that would mean your life. In that way. he opened fire. you have the right to recover that property by all legal means available to you. his contention should be that he followed them in order to recover his property. ―that he tried to follow the offenders bec he wanted to recover the properties stolen from him. It is not only an exercise of a duty but a right. you can use your gun to recover that property but not shooting them in the meantime. there must be really an unlawful aggression on the property aside from assault or attack on the person of the holder of the property or the possessor or owner and it is not however necessary that the life of that person be put in imminent danger or in grave peril. then he has all the right. So. There are so many things you can thing about eh. In defense of property. If that will be his line of defense. Because the unlawful aggression that is the taking or the destruction of the property—it depends ha as to what is the crime being committed—is already an act of unlawful aggression. Also. how much more if there will be an unlawful aggression towards the owner.board the jeep and knowing that they are armed. violence and intimidation. if she did not ask the fellow to kiss her or she did not provoke the person to do that. when you consider a grave offense under Art. It is directed towards her honor. we will have a break. nothing underneath. it is not a grave offense bec the penalty is only up to 6 years. ―you asked for it. What would happen there only is that it would be an immediate vindication of a grave offense. On the other hand. 9 of the RPC which carries with it an afflictive penalty. it was published in the newspaper. there was that case. it was with respect to Concepcion Lat. 9 it must be punished by an afflictive penalty which ranges from 6 years and 1 day going up. as I said one time. (Follow-up question with the substance that: What if the provocation to Concepcion happened long before she fought back?) It depends because kissing without the permission of a lady is unlawful aggression. ===break=== . If ever there was sufficient provocation. That is also unlawful aggression and the lady has the right to defend himself esp. that does not give you the right to rape her. You know. Why there are some people there in Makati Ave and Malate or wherever wearing scanty dresses. You know what the judge said. She was raped. That was really a very revealing case (heheheJ) meaning it is revealing in a way that the thinking of the people in NY is very much different from our thinking. lady. Say for example. Any more questions. Despite the fact that Castillo is the bf of Concepcion Lat. The provocation can never apply to Exequel Castillo even if they are already husband and wife. (heheheJ) But in the U. So. There are so many these days. It is personal to Concepcion. you have already the right to rape her…? We have not already reached that stage. there is no provocation ever on the part of Laurel in his relation with Exequel Castillo.Do you have any questions about self-defense? (There‘s a question of Claire re Laurel case—its blurry but the answer of Judge is…) The lack of sufficient provocation must be present when the unlawful aggression is taking place and that the unlawful aggression there took place without any provocation from Laurel with respect to Exequel Castillo.‖ You gave the provocation. 13 in RPC in mitigating circumstance is not the grave offense provided for in Art. the federal court of NY acquitted a person who raped a woman who one night left her apartment and went to the park with a see-through dress only. Because the grave offense as provided for in Art. The grave offense would be with respect to the perception of the person who feels offended. Even if a woman is a scant in a dress.S. is acts of lasciviousness a grave offense? If you are going to consider the penalty. It may be that the stranger may not be personally known to the person defending said stranger. it said no. would that constitute also a participation in the provocation of the relative? In some decisions of the SC. say for example. This is actually a little bit confusing sometimes bec of some decisions of SC in connection with. But there are also decisions of the SC that says that if the participation of the relative who was also defending the other is so active to the point that the provocation is almost equal to the provocation given by the relative. For example. the spouse. sige na. There would be quite a problem. then that is not covered by the third requisite in defense of relatives. resentment or other evil motive. They usually impute evil motives or revenge. the relative defending his relative must not have taken any part in the provocation in the event that it was his relative who gave the provocation. You all know that the relatives are enumerated in paragraph 2 and they are the ascendants. That is why suspicion is usually being cast upon some people who try to defend certain strangers especially if the person who may be a victim of the person defending the stranger is known to the person who is exercising defense of strangers. active attitude of the relative who undertook the defense of his relative. Now. The only condition that must be present aside from unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity of the means employed is that the person defending a stranger must not be motivated by revenge. descendants. at the time when the provocation was being given by the relative he is gong to defend said ―sige na. DEFENSE OF STRANGERS The third among the justifying circumstances is the defense of strangers. DEFENSE OF RELATIVES The third requisite is that. But defense of strangers does not only cover to those whom one personally knows. the first. In other words. beyond that.II. brothers and sisters and relatives by affinity within the same degree and relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree. a first cousin is in the verge of being shot by another bec he was the one who gave the provocation. if ever there is any participation of the relative defending the other. in a relationship bet two persons who are not . sometimes. in order that it will not be covered by defense of strangers.‖ Would the words ―sige na‖ or ―patulan mo‖ or whatever. it should be either passive or if active it would not tantamount to an active provocation. III. the defense of a person may be considered as defense of strangers. And this relative. then it would constitute as a performance of a legal duty. I would just like to point out that when an unlawful aggression is the performance of a right or when the unlawful aggression is emanating from a legal duty. strangers can refer to even a kid. that is not considered unlawful aggression. Say for example. the entire locality will be wiped out and there is only one remedy that can be done under the certain circumstance and that is to destroy . To the thief…yes. But of course. it could not be considered as an unlawful aggression.supposed to have that relationship meaning a paramour. the presumption is that the paramour who tried to defend the wife of the husband would be that he has been motivated by some evil motive that is to eliminate the husband so that he and his paramour would have no more hindrance to their relationship. Just the same as when you are trying to prevent another from killing some persons particularly those persons in authority or their agents. inflict fatal injuries to the husband. you prevented a thief from stealing the property of another and you have to hit his hand with a hard object. But then this is usually being equated to the protection of one‘s life or property which one believed is more important than the other or that the evil sought to be avoided which actually exists there is no less harmful means that can be employed in order to prevent the same other than what the person may be doing. a person who is a minor or any other person. an obligation or a lawful act. But then it could be sometimes correct to say that under certain circumstances. The words. it would be very difficult to convince the court and the people sometimes that such is really your intention. He will claim that there is unlawful aggression but under the law that is not unlawful aggression bec what is being performed by the one preventing the thief is a legal duty. IV. The usual example that is being given by those who are teaching law and law students and even those who are knowledgeable of the law is that in times of conflagration or big fire and that the conflagration is not prevented from spreading towards other directions. it would be otherwise meaning that even if there is a relationship between the person defending the stranger and the latter it could be established that he is not actually motivated by any other motive other than defending the life of another. Seeing that his paramour is being almost beaten to death by the husband. Naturally. AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR INJURY The fourth is about avoidance of a greater evil or injury. you may not be able to arrive at a well-reasoned out conclusion in connection with the exercise of a right of an ordinary citizen. I ask one time about.000. Like for example. 4. you have also to correlate the exercise of a right with civil laws not only criminal laws bec if you are going to separate the civil laws form criminal law. you have the right to do with . you have to demand from him that he be the one to cut the branches of the tree. Despite that popular belief. we do not believe in that. So. say for example. do you have a right in case where the branches of the tree of your neighbor encroaches upon your property to cut them? Do you have that right? You don‘t have that immediate right. V. So. That is exactly what is provided for under pgh. we would rather believe that the public officer or employee did not regularly perform his duty. a house that is worth P500. It is only when he refuse that you are allowed by law to cut the branches. then they are justified in doing so bec the law specifically provides that they are justified if their acts is in the legal performance of their duties. And when they perform their duty. So. that is only in theory. exercise of a right. In practice. which right is to protect the property that you own. the liability that the persons who benefited from the act shall share pro rata in the benefits that they derive in the payment of the properties that were destroyed. say for example. It shall be pro rata that there is actually a formula adopted by assessors or those in the law in connection with how to compensate these victims of this kind of circumstance. When you say performance of a legal duty this usually applies to public officers. Under the law. he cannot also be held liable and under the law he is justified. the regularity in the performance of the duties of these officers is actually accepted. employees or law enforcement agents bec to them we repose such duty to protect us from lawless elements. It is not necessary however that if you have. Say for example.000 that you have to contribute P500.other houses that will create a vacant space in order that the fire will not be able to spread. you cannot even pick the fruits in the branches of that tree unless those fruits fall in your property. you tried to prevent a person from stealing your property naturally you may commit an act of coercion. if you will recall. or other acts that may prevent the taking of your property. if in the event that in the regular performance of their duties they caused damage to another or they caused injuries. When a private citizen exercises his right. PERFORMANCE OF A LEGAL DUTY The fifth is performance of a legal duty or lawful exercise of a right. However. As a matter of fact. it is an exercise of a right. still the law says that this people are regularly performing their duties. But. Even in open space. that would be violative of their right. there must be a place which must be devoted or which must be available to them which will not affect others. look. you were run over by a bus. in enclosed places. if you want to smoke and die…(heheheJ) that is your right. if in the U. is that correct? I think that ought to be challenged. Just try to see my point there. how about in public spaces wherein it is an open space. Now. Hayaan mo sila. you cannot anymore claim that you have a right to claim damages from the manufacturer. if there would be a rule or a law that would prohibit smoking so that others may not be affected then there must also be a rule that those who are exercising their right to enjoy such pleasure as they believe it is. well I believe that there is really a constitutional issue with respect to that particular law and that particular rule or ordinance. I believe there is a law eh. No. I don‘t smoke anymore. Once you violate a law. you developed cancer. supposing you cross the expressway. Well. you are not yet attempting to commit suicide. Ah. you cannot because you are not supposed to be there. there is? Originally. If they want to smoke. he will not be able to collect from this people anymore bec he is violating a law. can he now even if there is no sign in the pack of the cigarettes.000. it does not specifically prohibit smoking. because it is prohibited by law to smoke. its all right. you cannot go after the manufacturer for damages. Phillip Morris is being assessed billions and billions of damages by smokers then if a person smokes in the Philippines. there was a proposal but has it been signed already? (4B: YES Sir) Is it effective? (4B: Not yet) When will it be effective? (4B:15 days) After 15 days probably someone will challenge that. No.S. But if you do not give them any space. But if you smoke. P4.what you like to do with your life. I quit. Is there any place where a citizen can still smoke? (Kathy L. It only prohibits it in certain places where there . Can you get any damages if you are violating the law? You cannot. could you collect damages from the bus? No. Eh. you are already being punished up to a fine of I believe. There is a law which prohibits you from being inside the expressway. he smokes Phillip Morris about ten packs a day. so we do not punish them. What I mean is that. dito sa Pilipinas okay. It has not been tested. This law is more of a protection to the manufacturers rather than a protection to the citizens. But it is against the law. Because. they are prohibiting smoking already. under the RPC do we punish those people who survive an attempt to commit suicide? No. say for example. Well. passed already by Congress. They cannot claim anymore against us because they are violating the law in the first place. I agree if you smoke on vehicles etc. wala na tayong problema.: From my understanding of that one. In the same manner. can he now claim damages against Phillip Morris. they hide. He is still a living example of a compulsive smoker. I am not joking. a person developed cancer bec he is a heavy smoker. Did they ever think of that? Kaya tuwang tuwa ngayon ang mga manufacturer. There is really a problem as to the constitutionality of this anti-smoking law. as when there is a law prohibiting you from smoking but you smoke. correct? So. But the requirement is that there must be an order…it must be lawful…coming from a superior officer…and directed towards the inferior officer. you want to call it.‖ (heheheJ) No. ―It is very bad. he has to kill some of them. The lesson that we had in the case of Pp. when orders actually are . it was just a joke among them but act ually what I am trying to relay to you is that---in these times. I have not seen the law. We have many law enforcement agents who should devote their time in catching all these people and that we should be strict in the implementation of the law. ―all right. OBEDIENCE TO A LAWFUL ORDER So. you go and catch all the bandits. that is murder. which was placed by another then it falls under Article 248 of the RPC. you cannot smoke? Definitely no? And they are not supposed to provide a space for smokers? I do not know. ―Well. in a restaurant. But if you do that.) Hmmm…I don‘t know. This people sometimes do not know what they are saying. that is not the remedy.are a lot of people but if for example in your residence. How about say for example. The remedy is simple…cut the source. they are now thinking of something again in our reach. the army still refuses to surrender. Oanes when they invoked this is that there is actually a lawful order but the lawful order is simply to get the person known as Balagtas and bring him to the station. even if that person probably will take those drugs. drugs. ―what is the state of peace and order in Mindanao?‖ The Muslim answered. The problem is there are so many who are against it eh. Just like the soldier. it is very bad. that is justifying. v. That would be a problem. The word ―dead or alive‖ is naturally the one that may be wrong but as they say if he resisted bring him dead. There was even a joke in Mindanao when a Muslim was asked. I don‘t know also the law.‖ In trying to capture them. Look. Who is that guy who proposed that those confiscated drugs be mixed with cyanide? Who proposed that? Yes…its now a proposal. No. If the soldier was told. the last of the justifying circumstances is obedience to a lawful order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose and directed towards an inferior officer. There is an intent to kill and if that person dies with the use of poison. So. It was the inferior officer who performed the lawful order. Still the intention to kill is there. They are trying to make people believe that what they may be doing is the right thing. that is obedience to a lawful order bec you know for a fact that if you are going to capture its either you or them who will naturally die. that is still murder because that is with the use of poison knowing that it may be consumed by another and you were instrumental in placing a poison in that particular goods or whatever. etc. you can still continue to smoke. VI.‖ ―Why?‖ according to the one who asked. it must be exactly what it has been stated as an order from a superior officer. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES In exempting circumstances.supposed to be obeyed by the inferior officers. he is to suffer the maximum of penalty imposable under the law.) the inherited insanity that is when it goes through your veins and you inherit it from your parents or grandparents or 3. I‘ll just discuss one or two. There are so many kinds of insanity. . That is when even if the order is lawful in the event that any other act is committed by them other than what is included in the order. there are instances where the inferior officers do not obey them. I do hope that somebody will try to find out whether it could be an area of study. As a matter of fact in RA 9165. The moment that a person is charged before the office of the public prosecutor and the charge carries with it a penalty of at least the maximum of 6 years and 1 day that person can be mandatorily drug tested even if he refuses. When a person is found to be insane at the time of the commission of the crime. he will be violating the law. Otherwise.1. So. Because self-induced insanity or insanity caused by abuse of drugs is not an exempting circumstance. would be charged of open disobedience. 2. RA 9165. it cannot be less than it. I do not know whether it could withstand the constitutional prohibition regarding self-incrimination. he will be giving evidence to being a user of dangerous drugs. These are the only insanities that are exempting. Do you know that RA 9165 even devoted several pgh in connection with aggravating circumstances and a person who is under the influence of drugs may waive his right to self-incrimination? Are you aware of that? A person who is under the influence of drugs and who committed a crime… the penalty for that crime would have for its at least maximum period not less than 6 years and 1 day. there are some provisions there that are questionable. Actually. it is a special aggravating circumstance. the act that was also performed by the inferior officer must be within the bounds and limits of the order given by the superior officer. that particular act that they performed will not be within the ambit of the lawful order given by a superior. In other words. he is exempted from criminal liability. shall be forced to be subjected to a drug test at the instance of the public prosecutor. the inferior officer would be…what? If he is a judicial or executive officer. It cannot go beyond it.) the acquired insanity. any crime that a person commit while under the influence of drug.) insanity which was derived from traumatic experience.really. Any person who is insane unless he acted during a lucid interval is exempted from criminal liability. defense. we must have to rely. The usual practice of some correctional institutions that after a person who was sent there by the court because he was insane and he committed a crime in releasing them without the consent of the court is an act of contempt. I personally believe that this law may be the subject to an amendment. And I think that is enough. I‘d like to go back to justifying. What the SC did in that particular case which was handled by Katrina Legarda and company was to remand the case to the lower court for further proceedings to determine of course the circumstances which lead to the acts that were committed by the husband against the wife. He shall be released only after he has already recovered his sanity but upon recommendation only of the Secretary of Health approved by the court which ordered his confinement in such an asylum. and then what would be the decision of the lower court in the event that it may be considered as a part of self-defense. the reasons probably. Almost everybody knew about the decision of the SC regarding the battered wife syndrome that is being used by some women‘s group to be considered among the justifying circumstances under self. it is the court which has the power to release the accused.However. So. But then as long as the law is there. Who is more knowledgeable than a doctor? The court do not have the capacity to determine whether the doctors findings is correct or not. Therefore. that the acts that were performed by the person defending himself must be immediately after the unlawful aggression was committed on him. not the head of the institution where the person is sent because of his insanity. ~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: JULY 7. it is the duty of the court to send him to an asylum or to an institution for insane persons. we have to wait until such decision of the lower court will be promulgated and that . Well the decision of the SC in the battered wife syndrome was to the effect that it indeed recognizes the existence of such circumstance in a household or in any other place but there is no pronouncement yet by the SC that it is a justifying circumstance. We will meet on Monday in criminal law and I‘m hoping to go as far as I can. So. Although in self-defense. 2003 Before going to exempting circumstances. as we all know. Not the Secretary of Health. the doctors etc will be liable for contempt. The battered wife syndrome may take some time before the woman perform an act which she will now claim to be part of self-defense. But there is no decision yet ha. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES I. INSANITY Exempting circumstances. differentiating it from imbecility. When we speak of insanity that its total loss of reason. during the commission of the crime and immediately thereafter. How about a battered husband syndrome? The women are always asking for equality. Well.it has yet again to reach the SC. imbecility etc. Imbecility is inborn or developed immediately after birth and stays forever to a particular person. they should not only consider the victim as only the wife. In other words. no…low battery na!) . husbands should also be battered once in a while. that is when by the abuse of the person of certain drugs. it is not present at the time immediately prior to or during the commission of the crime it cannot be considered. Sometimes. Any person who at the time of the commission of ANY CRIME. Insanity may be inherited. I hope that the case will reach the SC in order that we may be able to consider it as one of the justifying circumstances. the victim there may be the husband also. total loss of intelligence at the time when the crime was committed or immediately before the crime was committed. acquired or be by reason of traumatic experience and some other causes but the one that is not an exempting circumstances with respect to insanity is self-induced insanity. it recognizes the fact that such a circumstance happens in the household etc. is under the influence of dangerous drugs. Although the decision of the SC. Even if the person became insane immediately after the commission of the crime. it went blank…oh. but it has remanded the case for further proceedings meaning it gave due course to looking into whether a battered wife syndrome may be considered as a justifying circumstance but no decision yet is reached in regard to the issue of battered wife syndrome. this must be present immediately prior to the commission of the crime. if say for example. When I say self-induced insanity. any crime ha. substances or whatever. Well. such state of a person or such being under the influence of dangerous drugs is a qualifying aggravating circumstance (blurred…then. On the other hand. Otherwise. he became insane. You must recall that under RA 9165. If they are asking for equality then let the husband be also a victim once in a while. if you have read 9165. Well. that is not the insanity being spoken of under Art 12 of RPC. a person who is imbecile does not usually crop up just like mushrooms. ARTICLE 12. exempting circumstances start from insanity. whether he became insane or not ha. (heheheJ). when you look at your book. most probably it is simply an after effect of a traumatic experience and therefore it cannot be considered as an exempting circumstance. a. maybe they are not telling them to kill the other victims.II.‖ That‘s all. IV. these are simple events. SUCH MINOR SHALL BE PROCEEDED AGAINST IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS IN ART. For example. etc. UNLESS HE HAS ACTED WITH DISCERNMENT. we want him eliminated. ==2nd tape== V. the pointing of a gun. IN WHICH CASE. there is present an actual force or violence or intimidation upon the person prior to the commission of the act. the people who actually are their captives. without necessarily inflicting any force or violence upon them. WHO. PERSON OVER 9 YEARS AND UNDER 15. or other causes that may be not included in uncontrollable fear or irresistible force yet they would constitute exempting circumstance. And these people knows already that if they do not. WHILE PERFORMING A LAWFUL ACT WITH DUE CARE. naturally that would constitute a resistible force. COMPULSION OF AN IRRESISTIBLE FORCE Oh. IMPULSE OF AN UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR VII. The Abu Sayyaff. You were prevented . A PERSON OVER 9 YEARS OF AGE III. But they will just say that. Maybe it is a natural events which causes calamities. CAUSES AN INJURYBY MERE ACCIDENT WITHOUT THE FAULT OR INTENTION OF CAUSING IT. then they will be the one to be eliminated without necessarily pointing a gun.) INSUPERABLE CAUSE Insuperable causes. VI. PERSON. the pointing of a bolo or whatever. But in irresistible force. 80. ―oh. b. if he learned of the conspiracy in Davao. ―well. not under the law. or other natural calamities or sometimes you are prevented by specific circumstances that would cause you to fail in the performance of an act required of you by law. he can be a State Witness. he should be the least guilty. you were prevented by a flood. he should not be the most guilty. Where did he get that? The Rules says. di patay siya dun. I have been watching TV before I sleep and of course. minus ten points ka. those that are being exempted here are those who failed to perform an act or a crime by omission.) ABSOLUTORY CAUSES How about absolutory causes? What are the absolutory causes that you know which would constitute as exempting circumstances? Ah. Let us go to the Rules of Court (RoC) first. otherwise. And the authorities to whom he should report are the provincial governor. the city prosecutor. . bec. watching some well-known lawyers and then. Like misprision of treason. How will he know that those people are not also co-conspirators? E. what are those that the Rules of Court that exempts a person from criminal liability. What? I said…how can that be. A person who has already been accused of a crime but he turned as a State Witness under the condition set forth under the RoC is exempted from criminal liability.by a typhoon. Usually. As long as he is not the MOST GUILTY. The Rules did not say that. patay ka. his duty is to report to the authorities the fact of conspiracy that he has personal knowledge within reasonable time. So. I will not give you a credit of 1. I am surprised sometimes when they say. the city mayor. Where will he report the conspiracy that he came to know of his own personal knowledge? He should not report it to the prosecutor or fiscal of the place where he learned of the conspiracy. he was not able to leave Davao due to some circumstances not of his own fault and it is actually included among the insuperable causes. There are other insuperable causes and they are all in your book. so it is an absolutory cause. ―he should be the LEAST GUILTY‖. even well known lawyers. Pag isinulat niyo sa akin. even ½. he will be a ―sitting duck‖ there. What I am just trying to explain is the factual application of these causes in order that you may be able to understand them without exerting so much effort. If he fail to report it. yun yun tandaan nyo yun. he should report it in the place of his residence. Under the law. there are so many. the provincial fiscal. Sometimes. Kung ten points. But there is another provision there that will probably escape your attention. then he is exempted from criminal liability. if a person knows of the conspiracy to commit treason. State witness. say for example. Sabi nung iba. Remember that. and he is a resident of Manila. (heheheJ) That is very important. he should report in the office of the city prosecutor of Manila or the city mayor. he is the least guilty‖. And there are laws wherein although the crime or offense has been defined as an offense or a crime but it fails to provide any penalty. 247 of the RPC.‖ Naturally. the court can summarily dismiss him from the witness stand. of Justice can exempt any person who participated in the commission of the crime as long as he is not the most guilty and he is not a law enforcement agent and the Sec of Justice is satisfied that he is qualified under the witness protection program. etc. wala na? Seduction? Seduction of a Virgin? (sir: heheheJ) In rape cases. If they are asked. therefore. sir.The laws…Art. That is the difference between State Witness and the Witness Protection Program. Sa Witness Protection Program. Alam niyo ba yun? Huh. Maybe I have already said this. or his family and he surprises his daughter in the act of sexual intercourse with a man…a man ha. Witness Protection Program -. You should know the difference. my golly. The court probably may only interfere if say for example. walang pakialam ang korte dyan. RA 8043. Even the forgiveness by the wife to her husband in marital rape is an absolutory cause. Others…ano pa? Ano ba nakalista dyan sa libro niyo. you have to be sure that you can answer that.Dept of Justice lang ang nakakaalam dyan. so it is an absolutory cause. If the spouse who surprises the other in the act of sexual intercourse but only inflicts less serious or slight physical injuries. when he was a asked of his occupation ―police officer. the same. may absolutory cause dyan. The father who caught his daughter who is less than 18 and living with him. the person turned out to be a peace officer and he is being presented as a witness under the Witness Protection Program. you should also discuss those who are witness under the Witness Protection Program. importante yun. State Witness -. but if you are going to look at your Inter-Country Adoption Law. may penalty ba yan? Wala. marriage between an offender and an offended party are still absolutory cause. exempted din yan! Absolutory cause yan. Sec. What else? Ano pa ang mga absolutory causes diyan? Slight Physical Injuries which was inflicted during a tumultuous affray. I‘ll give you an example. (heheheJ) And he inflicts less serious or slight physical injuries.korte yan. When you discuss State Witness under the Rules of Court. exempted yan. there is such a provision there about . that admission disqualifies him under the WPP. it is also an absolutory cause. how much more a crime which is supposed to be repressed but it has not been defined and it has not been named as a crime then it has to be subject to legislation. minority. So. Binago na ngayon natin. 13 [2]) You know that we have the Privilege and the Ordinary. There are still many that I can‘t remember. absolutory cause din yun. defense of relatives and defense of strangers. What will it do? Declare that the act is a crime? But there being no penalty.attempted acts in violation of the acts that are penalized under the Inter-Country Adoption Law shall merit a penalty of 2 degrees lower than that which is fixed by law. If a minor is over 9 but under 15 and he acted with discernment. he cannot anymore question his unlawful arrest or detention. But the penalty fixed by law is 6 years and 1 day to 12 years. there you are. So. ang dali dali nyan basahin mo lang andyan na. If he is under 18 but over 15 at the time of the commission of the crime. I have mentioned those which are not in the book because those that are in the book. Can there be a penalty of 2 degrees lower from that? Wala. no penalty naman eh. it should still be divided into 2 with respect to the degree for which it may be lowered. They should be lumped only into 2. The Privilege mitigating circumstances are only two. With respect to minority and with respect to incomplete self-defense. if a person post bail. . But if the penalty that was imposed even if it is a special law is a penalty under the RPC still the accused is entitled to a penalty lower by 1 degree. It can be tried naturally but the court cannot impose any penalty. Attempt ka na lang ng attempt. Previously. before the passage of the 2002 Rules on Criminal Procedure. then he has to recommend to the President through the Sec. Except when the crime committed is an offense and the penalty that was imposed is a specific penalty for special laws only. No mention about prision mayor or prision correccional. kahit anong gawin ng korte dun. 5 of RPC although it is not exactly what the law contemplates but it is included. there can be no penalty that can be imposed. kahit anong gawin ng fiscal dun. we already changed it that it is not anymore a waiver of the right of the accused to question his unlawful arrest or illegal arrest and the succeeding preliminary investigation. the penalty that should be imposed should be less than 2 degrees or 2 degrees lower from that which the law imposes. When an act is considered a crime but there is no penalty. di ba? Tapos na ang istorya because you posted bail. So. Eh. MINORITY (Art. But then in minority. That is actually included in Art. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE I. There are so many. of Justice that the same be meted out with a penalty. he is entitled to a penalty which is one degree lower from that which is provided by law. Because under the rules even under the Rules of Criminal Procedure. LACK OF INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG (Art. However. the first thing that a lawyer would usually do esp. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING (art..II. Minority except for special laws is always a privileged mitigating circumstance. Now. If unlawful aggression is absent. But bec of the New Rules of CrimPro. Is there any problem? IV. III. we now have a problem. You are familiar with a pre-trial agreement? It is a part of pre-trial which usually takes place after the marking of the exhibits for the prosecution and the defense. it should be incorporated in the pre-trial agreement. existence and authenticity of the contents of the documents marked as exhibits. after all these stipulations or admissions have already been the subject of agreement with the parties. there can be a pre-trial agreement. the plea of guilt must be given or interposed before the presentation of evidence for the prosecution. Now. But during the pre-trial. etc. 13 [1]) Incomplete self-defense. and even defense of relatives and defense of relatives. 13 [7]) The problem there is plea of guilty. it is actually an essential element that unlawful aggression in all the 3 instances should be present. the penalty should be lowered by one or two degrees depending upon the discretion of the court. Except incomplete self-defense. they may be the source of ordinary mitigating circumstance if majority of the requisites are present. It is a fact that pre-trial in criminal cases is mandatory. if he is for the prosecution if there are documentary evidence is to ask the other party whether the other party will stipulate as to the due execution. PLEA OF GUILTY / VOLUNTARY SURRENDER(Art. that would be only an ordinary mitigating circumstance and it will not be a privileged one. say for example. then the court should order the issuance of the pre-trial agreement which pre-trial agreement must be signed by the parties (private complainant and accused) duly . It is when the parties agreed to enter into stipulations and admissions esp. And if he does. 13 [3]) Lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong. That is no problem. defense of relatives and defense of strangers. How about the other justifying or exempting circumstances? Well. there may be facts that are not in writing but then it could be the subject of stipulations. an ordinary mitigating circumstance may only be present such as when there is sufficient provocation on the part of the offended party. he can verify it from them. it is still a mitigating circumstance. the name. in pre-trial of cases. what will you do? Will that be considered as a plea of guilty to mitigate the liability of the accused? In my opinion. In the reservation of witnesses. is a plea of the accused after the pre-trial but before any witness is presented by the prosecution to be considered as a mitigating circumstance? And all of you also know that a case may be submitted for decision after the pre-trial even in criminal cases supposing that the issue is a legal issue. I will not allow that witness to testify. And he may be a witness who actually is present at the time when the crime was committed. If it is a photograph.‘ But both parties have already agreed that there will be no more presentation of evidence by the prosecution and that the court should decide the case based on the admissions. If it is a document. well. The intention of the law in considering that the plea of guilty is . All these must be taken up during the pre-trial. copy furnish the opposing counsel. But supposing that accused said. We cannot avoid also that during the trial a witness will surface and change his mind. it is different. in my long year in the bench. But I have developed a rule that if you reserved your exhibits at least 3 days prior to their presentation you must furnish the opposing counsel a clear copy thereof. all the events that transpired leading to the alleged commission of the crime are admitted. I have heard of all those things happening. the court must know the name of the witness and the nature of the testimony that he is about to give. bias witnesses. stipulations etc on the pre-trial agreement. if it came from a private office. I have developed also a sort of my own system of conducting a pre-trial. not necessarily the address and the nature of the testimony that that witness will give at the course of the trial. that the other party will not be surprised and he can verify whether such document really exists or if it came from a public office. It shall be contained in a manifestation to be filed with the court at least 7 days prior to the presentation of that witness. So. their names. the parties have to lay their cards on the table. But what would be in issue is a legal issue. however. the number of witnesses. a clear copy of the document. So. he can verify it there. of the pre-trial conference bec the pre-trial conference would still go to the aspect of determining the issues etc.assisted by their respective counsels and approved by the court. the purposes for which exhibits will be presented etc. the number of persons who would testify. all facts are admitted. We cannot avoid sometimes that there are evidence which at the time of the pre-trial are not available. what will you do? What you are to do is reserve your right to present exhibits that are not available during the pre-trial. a clear copy of the photograph. I know that what I did was wrong. etc. neither would he be allowed to interfere during the proceedings. But. ‗I will plead guilty na lang. a witness who suddenly was plucked out of thin air. Meron nyan. And he may be a credible witness. In other words. the nature of their testimony. That is to prevent fake witnesses from testifying. Otherwise. It should form part. The problem there is if those evidence are already admitted.. It will be aggravating. Deaf and dumb. That is the opposite. however. Even if there is already a warrant for the arrest of the accused. voluntary surrender may still be considered as a mitigating circumstance. I would like to save them the efforts of arresting me…that is voluntary surrender. he should be entitled to a mitigating circumstance. I would like to save the government of the expense etc. are you in fear already of being arrested by the authorities?‖ If his answer is yes. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION (Art. 2003 . no voluntary surrender. VI. time. V. or he is suffering from certain illnesses that restricts his movement or restricts his means of defense. If his answer is no. 13 [6]) It must actually relate to a passion that arose out of legitimate relationship. And sometimes. if he is the victim. We will give you those cases maybe by Wednesday. all that you have to ask is ―At the time when you surrender. Pag-voluntary surrender. DEAF AND DUMB…(Art. it is a sign of admission really of guilt and remorse and therefore. He is deaf and dumb.a mitigating circumstance prior to the presentation of evidence by the prosecution is that the accused is saving efforts. Voluntary Surrender. Very easy. it is actually of my own volition. those who are suffering from certain illnesses…these are mitigating circumstances that are considered as ordinary and other similar conditions of the offender. Do you have any questions regarding mitigating circumstances? ~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: JULY 9. money of the government in the prosecution of the case. or the police. 13[8]) The other mitigating circumstances are in relation to the physical condition of the accused at that time. that is mitigating. If the passion comes from an illegitimate or immoral relationship then that is already not considered. What does this mean? If you say specific. delivery took place within 100 meters from the vicinity of a school. therefore. not by degrees. then it is a specific aggravating circumstance bec. Bec. Bec. There is no issue in regard to ordinary aggravating circumstances bec they actually are circumstances which can be offset also by an ordinary mitigating circumstance. although said offense is absorbed in said crime or offense. Can you tell me of any specific aggravating circumstance in any felony under the RPC. There is none bec. Now. distribution. specific aggravating and the 2 sometimes are being combined—the special and specific aggravating circumstances. accdg. how can you apply the mitigating circumstance. to the law. it refers only to violation of RA 9165. theft but not malversation or sometimes qualified theft. we have a special aggravating circumstance bec. homicide. 14. if the act of sale. the use of illegally possessed firearm in the commission of homicide or murder. it could even be mixed with each other. Abuse of public position may be an aggravating circumstance in the crime of murder. it is usually applicable only to violation of special laws so. we have specific aggravating circumstances. these are only common to a particular crime or a particular violation of the law or a felony. In some special laws. that is what the law says. it has almost the same nature as a special aggravating circumstance. if one abused his public position. you will note that there are some crimes wherein a particular aggravating circumstance may actually be applicable to certain crimes like abuse of public position. in specific aggravating circumstance. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Aggravating circumstances have been classified into being an ordinary aggravating. by law. We have qualified and qualifying circumstances. In RA 8294. there are specific aggravating circumstances that cannot be found in other special laws or in the RPC particularly in Art. in violation of RA 9165. Say for example. they can apply to any of the crimes under the RPC. special aggravating. 14. It affects the imposition of the penalty as in some other aggravating circumstances only by an increase in period. it would tantamount as grave abuse of confidence and therefore it may be considered as . When an aggravating circumstance is specific. the use of said firearms is considered as a special aggravating circumstance. inherent aggravating. all the aggravating circumstances under the RPC are enumerated in Art. Now.ARTICLE 14. It cannot be applied to any other crime. But then. in the RPC. In Inherent aggravating circumstances sometimes it is not being considered to be a circumstance that would put the penalty in its maximum or in increase the penalty to a period or a degree bec this particular circumstance is inherent in the crime itself that the crime cannot be committed without its presence. the presence of mitigating circumstances will not even affect the penalty that will be imposed in violation of the said offense. there is homicide but the crime is not homicide but it is reckless imprudence so they are not covered. the SC not being a trier of facts which are usually addressed with the Court of Appeals. There have been many cases decided by the SC. Just like death under exceptional circumstances under Art. not actually one that decides legal questions only. well. QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE When you say qualified or qualifying. QUALIFIED vs. But sometimes the SC became trier of facts. It is sometimes confusing in regard to the determination of whether actually a homicide is supposed to be considered as such for purposes of considering illegal possession as a special aggravating circumstance. Naturally. it is not homicide. The crime there is death under exceptional circumstances and not homicide. The crime there is the death due to tumultuous affray. Say for example. the special aggravating circumstance that you can find there is only the use of illegally possessed firearm in the crime of homicide or murder. the 2 are different from each other. A qualified aggravating circumstance is usually one that is an aggravating circumstance that raises penalty either by one or two degrees higher. it is not correct. it is inherent. You have to abuse your public position in order that you may be able to commit an act of malversation being an accountable officer. 247. And in the event of malversation. your perception is that in death due to tumultuous affray.a qualified aggravating circumstance. in theft. As I said. in illegal possession of firearms. Why? Say for example. All other killings are not included in the term of ―homicide or murder‖. Reckless imprudence resulting to homicide. a crime of homicide is committed if a person dies. What is the rule then? In those cases that I have mentioned there could be a separate prosecution of the special law and at the same time a separate prosecution for violation of the RPC. it is not homicide although death may have resulted. a person was killed during a tumultuous affray. In abortion etc.. I have been saying that the word ―homicide or murder‖ is being used in their generic sense which could include only parricide and infanticide. That is qualified . There could be an instance where homicide may really be the result only of reckless imprudence but nevertheless the charge is homicide in itself. naturally there is also death but they are not covered. correct? NO. How about giving assistance to suicide which shall be punished by the penalty for homicide? The crime there is the giving of assistance in the commission of suicide. the condition of the offender or the condition of the circumstances at the time that it was committed will affect the imposition of the penalty. And that the penalty may either be raised to 2 degrees higher and the crime may be elevated to a more serious one. qualified ha. when the victim is raped. the owner or any passenger or occupant of the vehicle is killed. the property stolen has been specifically designated b y law as one that may only be committed through qualified theft such as theft of coconuts in a coconut plantation. the person who committed the same is a domestic servant. it will become an automatic penalty of death. etc is committed during the piracy. But then. there is now a move that these qualified. it will also be qualified when. the theft of fish in a fishpond. the penalty of death shall be imposed. in the case of kidnapping. must be alleged in the information. pag nakita mo nang qualified. in the case of qualified piracy. when the victim dies on occasion or by reason of the kidnapping. The fact of death is the qualified circumstance. the penalty of death shall be imposed. That is why it is called qualified. all these aggravating circumstances whether they be ordinary. The circumstances pertaining to the offenders are considered as qualifying circumstances. So. if that is a situational issues that is actually a state of the offender at the time of the commission of the crime…the position. irrespective of whether the person knew of the presence of the person who died on occasion or during the arson. the qualified circumstance there is when the victim is killed. 248 of the RPC. Let us suppose that at the time that the theft was committed. you see. These are the circumstances which involve only the imposition of the supreme penalty of death. the penalty of death SHALL be imposed. Now. As a matter of fact. So. But sometimes it is being mistaken also for qualifying. as has been said. Qualified circumstances are the new kind of aggravating circumstance. I will agree if it is qualifying always if it will raise the penalty to one or two degrees higher which is provided for by law but it will not increase the penalty only by a period. There are qualified aggravating circumstances there in qualified piracy if there is when rape. in the event that a person dies in cases of arson. So.noh. These are considered qualified thefts. qualifying and other circumstances that would increase the penalty either by one degree or if not. dehumanizing acts. the acts specifying what would constitute the . when the victim is subjected to inhuman or if not inhuman. So. In cases of kidnapping. Also. esp. Like murder. from homicide it goes up to murder because of the presence of qualifying circumstances as enumerated in Art. Pag merong qualified. say for example. Like in carnapping under RA 7659. the penalty SHALL be death. ah it only involves whether the penalty that will be imposed is death or not. In the same manner as in arson. Also. Let me put it this way. homicide. the penalty of death SHALL be imposed. specific or special or qualified or qualifying. the moment that the driver. Meaning to say. they are qualified circumstances. that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death but if any of the circumstances therein is present. there are about 10 qualified aggravating circumstances which raises the penalty from reclusion perpetua to death. In RA 8353. death na…tapos. the status of the person at the time. meaning that although the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. these are the classifications of the aggravating circumstances. You see. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES. Why is the latter qualified? When there is an employment of force. the police would . What else? Maybe. All that was alleged by the prosecutor is that the offender is an ascendant and that the victim is a descendant who is less than 18 years of age. pari na naman. violence. it is actually a means of committing a crime of rape. if there is an abuse of public position. the crime was committed in their presence to cause people to lose respect on them or sometimes to humiliate or put them in the bad light…according to the police. As you see in the recent cases of rape. in entering the dwelling of another. abuse of public position can either be also a qualified aggravating circumstance. qualified seduction. Yes. Then we have contempt or insult to public authorities. just like fraudulent machination. When we say contempt or insult to public authorities. Hindi. Not simply stating that where the victim is 7 years old. that the victim is an ascendant. it is inherent in the crime of rape bec. It is one of those which are a means of committing rape and it will become qualified if there are circumstances that would be present in a qualified rape. I. Qualified…sa ano lang yan ah…theft. it was considered already as a means. Well…qualified…qualifying…you have to see actually their effects. etc. the offenders were not sentenced to death bec. But the qualified seduction involves only a woman who is less than 18 years of age. II. If there is abuse of public position. But ordinarily. virgin and the offender is a priest --o. These are qualified seduction.qualified aggravating circumstance must also be stated in the information. the prosecution failed to allege the exact relationship between the offender and the offended party. hindi pwede. bet there is no qualified abduction ha. it is not the public authority who is a victim. ascendant etc. Is that enough…that the qualified aggravating circumstance of ascendancy and relationship be considered as qualified aggravating? The SC said no. ayan na naman. THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION I have already passed upon abuse of public position. it makes the crime as qualified rape. trespass to dwelling. In cases of rape. there could still be conviction but the penalty of death cannot be imposed. Usually. The 2 can go together ha. respeto mo. Well. It its because of old age or very young age. Akala mo siga yan ha. IF THE LATTER HAS NOT GIVEN PROVOCATION.say. that is disrespect of age. however. The disrespect of a young age is. to make people lose respect on them. it can be proven by the simple fact that the offender will always admit that he knew of the presence of the mayor.‖ That is an aggravating circumstance. extremes noh. masakit nga naman yun. AGE. the mayor is attending a function. Eh. absorbed in treachery. the one who assaulted a man who is already 60 years old is only 20 years old. How about disregard of rank. who will not know the presence of the mayor in a municipality if you are from that place. age. It is quite aggravating. So. One may not absorb the other bec the two are different from each other. usually that is the case. si mayor yan. only those who have a superior rank may be the offended party. what he did was to stab a person right in the presence of the mayor. the crime is committed in the presence of these authorities to humiliate them. si mayor yan ha. what I do believe is that if the old man is so old already that he was taken advantage of as the old man is defenseless…that is treachery. You did not respect the age of an old man. Those who have inferior ranks cannot be a party to this aggravating circumstance unless the one who has an inferior rank be the offender. sex or dwelling of the offended party. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH INSULT OR IN DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE TO THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS RANK. Aside maybe of abuse of superior strength. OR THAT IT BE COMMITTEED IN THE DWELLING OF THE OFFENDED PARTY. ―Tignan ko nga kung hindi mapahiya yang mayor na yan. What bad light? Is there such a thing as a bad light? Pwede.‖ O kaya ―pare. Disregard of rank…well. yung medyo mainit noh. Even if you are not from that place.‖ So. you hit your manager or your superior. OR SEX. Eh. How about rank.‖ Eh. ―nandito pala si Mayor. eh may isang loko. some may have believed that disrespect of old age is absorbed also in abuse of superior strength. And the abuse of superior strength there is only a prelude to the treacherous act employed by the offender and that the . age and sex. But. Well. tignan nga natin. ―to put us in a bad light‖. Ingat ka dyan. That is contempt or insult to public authorities III. Say for example. But actually. Age. you see. Say for example. people will tell you—―Pare. that is aggravating. In the office there are always aggravating circumstance because the employee sometimes would even disobey the superior. robber gang…would you have any respect of the sanctity of the home of the person. Hindi. The more that they are in the upper strata of society. because the qualified trespass to dwelling is in itself a crime. Natural yun. you have to disregard the sanctity of his or her dwelling. Akyat-bahay gang. for her sex. And if he believes that the temper of the wife has already simmered down. Sometimes. that is a disregard of sex.45. That is 100%. There is an . Where a man may be an old man but sometimes he may be of equal strength than a young man. there is no disregard of sex there. in a small household. not men. You will always encounter this kind of problem in a family. 80? And according to them he is taking about 21 vitamins a day. it depends upon the circumstances. tignan natin ten years from today. it is always the wife who raises her voice. Eh nakita mo. Because in abuse of superior strength. Well. the husband will not raise his voice but he will just leave the house. the more that these things are happening. Sige na nga kung ayaw nyo e di wag.disrespect to age is actually being absorbed sometimes. Sex. If ever that there is a problem. But because there are women who do not deserve the respect by reason of their sex. But in some cases that I have read.hindi. If you stole something from the house of the offended party. Hintayin na lang natin na bitiwan yung baril. Kaya nga battered wife syndrome pero nangyayari yun eh kahit na may battered wife syndrome even if it becomes an act of self-defense noh. He is how old. mabubuti pa yung mga mahihirap coz sometimes these husbands do not raise his voice. (girls of 4B: violent reaction) Mangyayari yun. O sabi nila si Eddie Garcia di mo kayang patumbahin. You trespass the dwelling of another. Sometimes this is inherent. Ok. Sige. But the woman must deserve that she be respected for her being a woman. So. Sa pelikula lang yun. There is no abuse. Even if the man chooses to be taken for a woman. is there a disregard of sex? Wala eh natural yun. disregard of dwelling of the offended party. the superior courts said that the two can go together without one absorbing the other because disrespect to age and abuse of superior strength may be different from each other. ginulpi nung asawa yung asawa. may dala-dalang dalawang . It is not always that when a woman is a victim. what happens? That is a great disparity of the strength between the offender and the offended party. Sabihin mo teka muna. Eh yung mag-asawa. Okay. babae yan eh. he will return. hindi natin maano yan. There could be a mistake of fact but there could be no disregard of sex. I have seen people like that. it will result to v iolence. Oh. up to now its only women whose sex are being disregarded. yun binabaril ka naman eh…ay naku. There will always be disagreement between the husband and the wife…sometimes. that is. violation of domicile. Like in qulifed theft. Just like some people. walang utang na loob. that is when there is an aggravating circumstance. And still not satisfied. That is what we call an . during a rainy day or night. qualified theft. abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness refers to the character of the person. they are never satisfied. it is actually aggravated only when the police officer when asked to return the articles that he has taken without any search warrant refused to return the same. (heheheJ) literally. violence and intimidation is employed. So. thank you very much. sick so you told him to come in your house. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS How about abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness. he asks for your hand. will you please heat the soup that is in the casserole and get some dried clothes from our drawers and arrange the bed so that this person can sleep tonight. you saw a man or a woman drenched to the skin. And then you called your wife. if grave in nature. IV. the crime is not bailable because the penalty that may be imposed is reclusion perpetua. We always believe in the goodness of people that whenever we have done something for them that is good. But in violation of domicile. There are other crimes that involve dwelling.aggravating circumstance. Obvious ungratefulness. they will reciprocate in doing something good for us. he is not satisfied. After clothing him. I will be waking up early in the morning. that is where force. He looks hungry. he will swallow you whole. becomes a qualified aggravating circumstance. There are times that when you even literally feed a man from your hand he will still bite your hand. feeding him. you all know this. This may be applicable in crimes against persons which includes rape but not crime against property. your place is very clean. what is one of the ways of committing qualified theft? Thru grave abuse of confidence but as an ordinary aggravating it is simply abuse of confidence. giving him a bed. if the amount is more than P22.‖ When you woke up. you give it to him. when he even told you. abuse of confidence. Tomorrow do not wake up early in the morning. Ah. it is the fact of failure to return. What is the aggravating circumstance in qualified trespass to dwelling? Its only when there is use of force or violence or intimidation in the entry. Or when being asked to leave etc. he will still get your arm. There are some people like that. I will clean the premises. Remember ha.000. ―Sir. clean. After giving your hand. In tagalog. But there are people who does not have that kind of attitude. Obvious ungratefulness…say for example. sir as a sign of gratefulness. In other crimes. OR WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. The 2 satellites are the official residence of the President in Arlegui street and the vacation house of the President in Baguio City. it is not a palace.aggravating circumstance of obvious ungratefulness. not of respect to the people. well. Pero yung mga sabing natulungan kita. But when it is committed in the place. Because to be ungrateful is not in itself a crime. You refer to contempt or insult to public authorities when the person who has an authority is present and yet to insult him or to put him to disrepute or just to make him lose respect in the face of the people. What is beautiful there. Then. even if the place at the time . If a crime is committed in a place where public functions are being performed. what is being considered as an aggravating circumstance there is lack of respect to the place where public functions are being performed. When the crime is committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in any place where public functions are being performed it is an aggravating circumstance. nabigyan kita ng trabaho. Because that would fall under contempt or insult to public authorities. there are 2 satellites of the palace of the Chief Executive. But not the palace of the North. Dun sa ibaba. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE PALACE OF THE CHIEEF EXECUTIVE.. not the persons who are performing their duties there. Actually. You must commit a crime which is accompanied with obvious ungratefulness. it is still an aggravating circumstance bec. Irrespective of whether at the time that it is committed. In Pawai. the palace of the sky or whatever. what do you call that--palacio de amiana or whatever—in Ilocano. you can walk through the grasses and there is no pollution. When you go to the garden. V. it is overlooking the Pawai lake. It is simply a big house. OR IN HIS PRESENCE. that is when there is an aggravating circumstance. there are no public officers or employees there performing their public functions. there is what you call contempt to public authorities. the palace of the North. Ilocos Norte. there are I think 3 and then the sala. speaking as an ordinary human…that is obvious ungratefulness but not in the commission of a crime. you can walk through the woods. They are included among the palaces of the President. consists of only 4 or 5 rooms upstairs. it is actually the place that is to be considered. In the Phils. So. we have only one palace and of course. You can even gather mangoes and everything there if you are the tenant. I have seen the place about several times. is the scenery. I think. Even in the academe.) it was purposefully sought to facilitate the commission of the crime.when it was committed was vacant. it‘s alright. OR BY A BAND. he will not be giving very difficult questions. as long as it is being used in the performance of public functions. criminal law sometimes. I do not know next year. VI. say for example. It starts at the beginning of dusk and ends at the beginning of dawn because at the start of the beginning of dusk. magaling yan ma‘am. That is the period of nighttime. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE NIGHTTIME OR IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE. but supposing I become the examiner. Nighttime becomes an aggravating circumstance only if 1. but I was talking to Dean Villanueva. There are no more people there but it is considered still as an aggravating circumstance because of the nature of the place. What is the definition anyway of nighttime? It starts at the beginning of dusk and ends at the beginning of dawn. Four years ago it is a killer subject. people change their minds whenever they are already in . that is wrong. WHENEVER MORE THAN THREE ARMED MALEFACTORS SHALL HAVE ACTED TOGETHER IN THE COMMISSION OF AN OFFENSE. Lahat ng sabihin sa kanya mabubuti. The examiner now. I don‘t know this year. Two years ago nga…well. I was telling him. Me. supposing a crime of homicide is committed in the courthouse at night. ―Oh. Siguro pahirapan ano. why are we not saying anything. the Ateneo people or people from other university. although it is only 10%. I did not try to put your 1 set of work of opinion in connection with the appointments. I do not know also. Iba na SC justices ngayon eh. ‗mabuting tao yan ma‘am. is a killer subject. Yun ang impression nila. IT SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMMITTED BY A BAND. They put a third one. I know the examiner. You have to be resourceful because you know. Hindi 6pm to 6am yan nor sunset to sunrise. The next aggravating circumstance is nighttime or uninhabited place or by a band. there is still darkness. Even if. WHENEVER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES MAY FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE. madaming sinulat na libro yan— di naman nya nakita kung ano yung sinulat. there is already darkness and when there is a start of the beginning of dawn. or to facilitate the escape of the offender. I don‘t still agree to that bec. I mean. Tignan natin…let‘s see how things develop. The only problem is that people perceive that the SC is now being politicize. then it is an aggravating circumstance. if you know the president cannot always be all knowledgeable. maybe in your year. or in order that the offender may not be identified.The SC is always subject to barrage of comments. Even during accidents etc. iba na eh justice na ko. EARTHQUAKE. it qualified your offense to a more serious one and that is qualified theft. on occasion of calamity. if you killed a person. Bec if the armed men have any participation at all in the commission of the crime. sasabihing uninhabited. it is also a qualifying aggravating circumstance bec a person stole any of those cargoes during a vehicular accident. So. What is important is that at the time of the commission of the crime where the possibly of help is remote. Cellular nya mas bago pa kaysa sa akin eh. wala naman sa bundok yan eh. Their presence only embolden the offender to commit the offense bec of the presence of the armed men. Eh bihira naman ang pumupunta sa bundok. Bec. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID OF ARMED MEN OR PERSONS WHO INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY Aid of armed men. Nighttime. etong school pag walang tao. VIII. When he is already there seating in the bench. considered as uninhabited place yan. Pero si Ka Roger. nothing. poor. . EPIDEMIC. I should act and behave like one. the crime committed is qualified theft. On occasion of calamity or misfortunes. There was a time when he was still recruiting young students in the place where I was a judge. that is a qualifying aggravating circumstance under Article 248 of the RPC. talagang wala sya. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE OCCASION OS A CONFLAGRATION. It becomes qualified when it comes to crimes to property and qualifying when it comes to crimes against persons. VII. When you stole a property. sina Ka Roger na lang. SHIPWRECK. Its not that the place is permanently uninhabited.the SC. OT OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE. Oh. Eto either qualified ito or ordinary. uninhabited place. Kung sa bundok. there must be no conspiracy in order that aid of armed men may be considered as an aggravating circumstance. The armed men must not have participated. then there is conspiracy. tsaka yung microphone nya at tsaka yung cellular na ginagamit. tignan mo yung sa likod nya. The place may be at that point in time uninhabited. tignan nyo ha. THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST. even if you are asleep and you were asked upon waking up. 3 points up to 4 points yan. I want to. You ask him. We even ride in the same plane. Balita ko. I really want you to memorize. wala na kayong ginagawa diyan eh. shall we call it. Marami akong spy dyan ha. SHALL HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED BYT FINAL JUDGMENT OF ANOTHER CRIME EMBRACED IN THE SAME TITLE OF THIS CODE Who is a recidivist? Any person who will in 10 years from the date of his last release from prison or last conviction. Reiteracion. nagkikita kami kahit sa Iloilo. habituality or reiteracion. Yung mga makukulit. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE. They are residents of balik-balik. even in your sleep you can recite. Tamo kahit si Mr. spy ko yan. Balik-balik. So. but maybe for a few years more. Ang laking puntos nyan. I could still do all the things that I am doing but there is a time of saturation eh. kabisado niyo naman yan eh. X. Leagogo. AT THE TIME OF HIS TRIAL FOR ONE CRIME. papaano hindi na kayo nag-aaral. Usually. That is what I want. Well. Eh.IX. REWARD. Dun siya sa unahan ako dun sa huli. Sometimes. Naghiwalay lang kami para hindi mahalata. THAT THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED FOR AN OFFENSE TO WHICH THE LAW ATTACHES AN EQUAL OR GREATER PENALTY OR FOR TWO OR MORE CRIMES TO WHICH IT ATTACHES A LIGHTER PENALTY. you can recite. XI. OR PROMISE . A RECIDIVIST IS ONE WHO. he will not admit it. I don‘t want you to just be listening to me. he commits any crime embraced in the same title of the code is a recidivist. Hopefully. quasi-recidivist. (heheheJ) Oh. Kelangan memoryahin nyo yan—habitual delinquency. You‘ll feel that you have had enough but let‘s see when that time comes. always relying on my explanations. I don‘t know. I am having the intention of misleading you sometimes so that you will study. recidivist. fire. di na kaya gawin. Price. etc. Both deserves the application of the aggravating circumstances. Reward. those which are not material but then to the advantage and of course. STRANDING OF A VESSEL OR INTENTIONAL DAMAGE THERETO. So. EXPLOSION. It is bec of the volume that caused the commission of the crime. Inundation involves liquid or semi-liquid form that is used in order to commit the crime. reward or promise. XII. derailment of locomotive. Eh. DERAILMENT OF A LOCOMOTIVE. any promise. anong matitira dun? Matatabunan yun. Promise. that is not correct. These aggravating circumstances are not only applicable to the principal by direct participation. not only advantage but to the benefit of the principal of direct participation. The more that it should apply to the one who offered the price. as long as that promise is taken as such by the principal by direct participation. or material things. reward or promise…NO. Not only one ha. stranding of a vessel. But if you went to call somebody. usually in monetary consideration. FIRE. he is supposed to be the one to suffer the aggravating circumstance of price. OR BY USE OF ANY OTHER ARTIFICE INVOLVING GREAT WASTE AND RUIN. Kaya nga hindi mo tuloy alam ngayon if you are going to allege that both are supposed to be the subject of an allegation of an aggravating circumstance of price. Some have the idea that because he was induced and motivated by the price. This in the olden times are being used by those who want to wipe out a tribe or whatever. That is inundation. They usually use inundation or similar acts in order that they may be able to achieve their purpose. Para masira yung bahay nung kalaban mo. kelangan bayaran pa niya. the price. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED BY MEANS OF INUNDATION. there are 2 principals here: principal by inducement and principal by direct participation.Alright. o yun dapat yun aggravating talaga. reward or promise. Most of the time. By means of inundation. I don‘t know the explanation in your book—no explanation at all? None. this is an aggravating circumstance not only against crime against persons cut also crime against property. the same. . dun mo pinadaan yung lahar sa Pampanga. POISON. It is applicable to both the inducer and the principal by direct participation. But then. But the new concept now under RA 7659. is that if death occurs by reason of arson. syempre masakit yun. Sinunog mo. It used to be that if death occurs. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH EVIDENT PREMEDITATION Let‘s go to evident premeditation. it involves cruelty. I burned the bldg bec I only want to see that bldg on fire. Oh.Well. you just don‘t want to kill the victim but you want him to suffer pain. death ka. You want to kill a person. Kaya the best defense is that I want to kill him. derailment of locomotive. the penalty shall be death whether you know or you do not know the existence of the person in the place which you burned. Patay yung nagnanakaw. Di mo nga alam eh. you will still have the chance of being sentenced to reclusion perpetua just voluntarily surrender or plead guilty. walang hiya naman noh…sa bagay okay din noh. XIII. The problem is say for example. I don‘t like the owner but I did not intend to kill the person who was there at that time. the only crime is arson that is the old concept. Evident premeditation simply means that a person has already decided to commit a crime and he has planned to that determination despite the lapse of the period for him to reflect upon the consequences of the acts he . It is the means that was used. you will be sentenced only to reclusion perpetua. By the very nature of the means that you used. Pinasadsad mo yung barko para patayin lang yung tao. it is my intention to kill him. These are means of committing acts which are considered as aggravating circumstances. The law did not distinguish. that is the problem. fire. would cruelty be also considered or is cruelty absorbed if the killing is with the use of fire and explosion? Absorbed sa cruelty yan. Why? Bec. burn him…that is aggravating. As the use of fire or explosion is a qualifying aggravating circumstance. IN arson. But if you say. ikaw din patay ka din bec the law did not distinguish whether the person who was killed at the place which was burned is also committing a crime or not. So. it becomes also a qualified aggravating in the case of arson. The stranding of a vessel. this law ought to be amended…mali. irrespective or whether you know or you do not know the existence of a person in the bldg that you have burned bec arson refers always to a bldg the penalty shall be death if death occurs on occasion or by reason of arson. paano kung may nagnanakaw dun tsaka mo sinunog. If he is only a maniac from the decisions of the SC. You see in your book. I believe that that is already evident premeditation eh.) You know that is a real issue bec I would say that the decisions of the SC in some cases wherein it even said that there must be a lapse of sufficient time to reflect upon the consequences of his acts. a long time of imprisonment. and yet he performed the act. Maybe to kill. One is when the girl is less than 7. The people around them knew about what they have agreed upon. it depends upon what kind of insanity. (Mane: Sir. (Thony: What if a couple is in the sexual act but within that period the girl wanted to stop. he knows that what he is going to do is inherently wrong and he knows the consequences of what would happen to him if caught and that is death or if not. The insanity that is supposed to be an exempting circumstance is one where the person has a total loss of reason and intelligence. one of them suddenly stabbed the guy dead. it is actually a matter of proof. (Joanne: Sir. it is inherent. Bec at the onset. even in rape. But evident premeditation is an inherent aggravating circumstance in robbery. if a person saw a woman lying. Ano aaksidentehin mo lang? (Joanne: What if walang intention? Nakita lang. He decides to rape the first woman who comes. But maniacs. I will not agree. Even if the victim was not identified prior to the commission of the crime. But the guy does not want to. 2 hours or 1 hour maybe but I think that the SC has not had the occasion of having to decide. Is that qualified rape?) Ang qualified rape iho…Those that belong to the 10 instances enumerated under RA 8353. Second is when the offender is an ascendant and the defendant . can it be argued that the maniac is insane?) No.intended to commit and he still committed the act that he has committed himself to perform. some says that she knows what she is doing and yet there is that impulse in which it may be controlled. even if it took him about 10 mins or 5 mins in deciding to rape her. what if may maniac and naghintay lang siya sa may kanto. Is that evident premeditation?) Maniac? You remember the case of murder that a group of persons in Tondo have agreed bec that is their way of life there at that time that the 1st man who will pass by them will be killed so they were just there just watching the flies go by etc. So. The SC there considered evident premeditation as one of the qualifying aggravating circumstance. sex maniacs. Paplanuhin mo ang rape eh. so when a man passed by. Some authors say that a kleptomaniac should be placed under insuperable causes. look at the kleptomaniac. where does the kleptomaniac belong? Does the kleptomaniac belong to an exempting circumstance? Insuperable cause? They are even debating eh. Sir. those are the qualified aggravating circumstances in the crime of rape. Even if you initially used one weapon and then turned to another weapon in order to complete what you have started. The other are when the offender is a member of the A. the religious is in the actual performance of her vocation. I called my staff. He is good at writing decisions. It must not actually be what you think it should be. Let me put it this way.is an ascendant etc and that the descendant is less than 18 years of age. ganun lang. then the offender rapes her. When the offender is suffering from HIV or AIDS or other venereal diseases and rapes the victim and transmitted the virus to the victim. I tried to kill someone by poison pero kulang…) Evident premeditation na yun basta poison. The words that he use are so intertwined with each other that it would be easy for you to understand yet you have to look sometimes… (Joanne: Is the method employed involved in evident premeditation. Well. tapos hindi siya namatay. No offense meant pero pag yung iba lang diyan. if there is a complaint there would be an investigation for rape. uy umalis na ba si Sanaty? Umalis na. From morning until 5pm. When the victim is pregnant and her pregnancy is known to the offender. Not only in holding an umbrella.P. Although he writes very long decisions. Magaling mandaya eh. and he abused his public position or a policeman etc. boss. does evident premeditation take into consideration the means employed) Yung dalawang yun those are the means in order to kill the person. Not qualified. I was sharpening my bolo and I know that in the afternoon he . the evident premeditation must start from the beginning.F. When the victim is under custody or detained and she was raped under detention. I grabbed the knife and then killed him. So. my opinion is that there is no rape. Why in the 1st place would she consent when it is there already? You read the decisions of Justice Fernando in rape cases. (…Sir. When the victim is a religious and the same is known to the offender and when at the time of the rape. He has developed a penchant for using better words to what is the feeling of a man in connection with his relations with a woman. actually. He always says that the flesh is weak etc. one day. I believed that I am at the losing end. What you are asking is whether there is rape. no. When there is actually certain relationships such as uncle. I already started sharpening my bolo. Lahi ni Satanas (heheheJ) So. But if say for example they have already performed initially the act and then the woman refused and then the man continued. When the victim is suffering from physical disability. I and my neighbor in the land that we are both tilling had a dispute over the boundaries. Fernando is good at that ha. you will learn from him. Or when the offender is a common-law father of the victim and that the victim is less than 18 or step-father and the victim is less than 18. psychological incapacity or disability etc. For example. Okay. I will convict him of voluntary rape. you have your own rooms. that was actually the language used by the speaker at that time. So. that is still covered. But I remember a former Sec. He should have known already who his wife is. even if it is interrupted by another act. Bakit kahit anong lasing mo kilala mo ang asawa mo. he said. when my intended victim passed by. EMPLOYING MEANS. THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH. He entered the wrong room. . WITHOUT RISK TO HIMSELF ARISING FROM THE DEFENSE WHICH THE OFFENDED PARTY MIGHT MAKE. Do you mean to tell me that my dropping of stone over his head would interrupt the evident premeditation that I have already employed? No. it will not. So. I said. When he enter. they went to their respective rooms drunk. OR DISGUISE BE EMPLOYED XV. Today. (louder heheheJ) SO. Sabi nya. sabi ko. of Justice who espoused the crime of reckless imprudence resulting to rape. But before. aayaw ayaw ka pa ha. But it was dark. he wanted sex with his wife but it turned out that the woman there is not his wife. uy. That is a simple explanation of how evident premeditation. of course. (heheheJ) You went into a outing. but the men had a drinking spree at the beach. it would not matter anymore bec there is marital rape. kumikisay pa so I got a big stone and dropped it on his head. pagdaan nya mamaya… So. THAT CRAFT. there could be no rape through reckless imprudence. METHODS OR FORMS IN THE EXECUTION THEREOF WHICH TEND DIRECTLY AND SPECIALLY TO INSURE ITS EXECUTION. So. So. but towards achieving the same results. rape there is evident premeditation. FRAUD. Wag mo kong lokohin (heheheJ) If I were the judge. OR MEANS BE EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE. I suddenly hacked him with the intention of decapitating him pero dumaplis lang kalahati. Ayun.will pass by. XIV. any other question about evident premeditation? Usually. XVI. THERE IS TREACHERY WHEN THE OFFENDER COMMITS ANY OF THE CRIMES AGAINST PERSON. the man do not have any intention to commit voluntary rape but then it turned out that the woman with whom he had sex at that time by means of force or violence is not his wife. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH TREACHERY. (aleviosa). Abuse of superior strength etc. And those who are actually are in a state of defenseless condition. Breaking the wall and cruelty and even use of motor vehicle. THAT MEANS BE EMPLOYED OR CIRCUMSTANCES BROUGHT ABOUT WHICH ADD IGNOMINY TO THE NATURAL EFFECTS OF THE ACT. OR BY MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLE. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YEARS OF AGE. XVIII. I‘ll just lump them into a single discussion. Treachery there is no problem. naturally we have the employment of craft. FLOOR. THAT AS A MEANS TO THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME A WALL. one who is under the influence of liquor… ~~~end of tape~~~ . one who is sleeping. OR WINDOW BE BROKEN XX. THAT THE WRONG DONE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME BE DELIBERATELY AUGMENTED BY CAUSING OTHER WRONG NOT NECESSARY FOR ITS COMMISSION Aside from evident premeditation. Treachery. MOTORIZED WATERCRAFT. or disguise. ignominy and unlawful entry. OR OTHER SIMILAR MEANS XXI. XIX. there is always treachery. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY THERE IS AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY WHEN AN ENTRANCE IS EFFECTED BY A WAY NOT INTENDED FOR THE PURPOSE. AIRSHIPS. Say for example. DOOR. ROOF. That is employment of means or methods in order to assure that the person will not be able to put up a defense from the assault or attack to be employed by the offender.XVII. to weaken the defense. fraud. #9165. and in some instances it can be considered as exempting or qualifying/qualified circumstance --. descendants. Accessories who concealed or harbored offenders --. brothers and sisters as long as they are living together shall be exempted from criminal liability. ascendants (as the case may be).Date: 14 July 2003 Transcribed by: Ria Berbano ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES The very description of the circumstances would already put you on guard in relation to what kind these circumstances are. Now in relation to ascendants.A. you put away such particular relationship under exempting circumstance. So. they cannot be considered as exempting circumstances. We start with exempting circumstances in relation to relationship. descendant. malicious mischief to their parents. relative by affinity within 3rd civil degree or by consanguinity within 4th civil degree are exempted from criminal liability when it comes to being an accessory under the RPC. falsification.qualifying aggravating and qualified aggravating circumstance. Now. Those who commit theft. Alternative simply means that it can be considered as either mitigating or aggravating. and their daughter is less than 18 years of age and living with them and the injuries inflicted upon the daughter is only less serious or slight physical . we have for the first alternative circumstance: RELATIONSHIP. ascendant. But the same may not be true with respect to special laws such as obstruction of justice like anti-fencing with respect to par 1 and also as protector of coddlers under R.except for those that are provided for by law punishable under special laws in relation to the relationship to the offender such as being the spouse. if a parent catches his/her daughter in the act of sexual intercourse with a man. swindling. injuries. Now. So. There are circumstances. in infliction of physical injuries or in attempted homicide (but not frustrated murder. The relationship between the spouses are considered as an exempting circumstance under the said article. There is now a qualified aggravating circumstance in case of crime against persons which used to be crimes against chastity --.A. In the event that the exact relationship between the offender and the offended party is not alleged in the information. They are supposed to be inherent in the commission of a crime because such crime would not be even be committed unless their relationship are present --. There are others that are considered to exempting circumstances. #7610 of the provision of Art. usually. which . that may aggravate either as an ordinary or qualified/qualifying circumstance with respect to relationship may be committed only if the crime is against person or property.A. etc. it is an aggravating circumstance. however. or the offender is a priest in qualified seduction of other relatives by affinity or by consanguinity or even ascendants or descendants. I am still entertaining the idea that infliction of corporal punishment by parents to their children. particularly under Article 263 of the RPC (serious physical injuries). the parent cannot be held criminally liable for the injuries because they are presumed to be exempted by law. But if the offender has a lower degree by blood or by affinity. …they are inherent circumstances. the qualified aggravating circumstance of relationship cannot be taken into consideration. #7610 (The Child Abuse Law). if the offender is of higher degree by blood. But there is no express repeal or modification in R. then it would me mitigating circumstance. attempted murder). You will find this true also under Article 247 under RPC. you have noted from several decisions of the SC. Although we have R.A. 263 and other laws that are existing before the passage of R. including the age of the offended party.that is rape. They could not even be aggravating. abduction. There is a conflict between the said law and the provisions of the RPC. may exempt them still from criminal liability.the relationship of a priest and a member of his flock. you have it then. Now. #7610. As a matter of fact. The other private crimes that are seduction. particularly in cases of rape that these aggravating circumstances must be particularly alleged in the information. is mitigating is some respects. a child of that was parricide. there is simply mitigating circumstance. it is aggravating in the event that that person who has a high degree of blood relationship or affinity is the victim. That was the time when the Court‘s attention had not been called by a young lawyer from the PAO that the accused in those kinds of cases are not being informed of the nature and the cause of accusation against them and therefore they cannot be considered as qualified aggravating circumstance.. . If he is the offender. or a descendant. But during the trial. But then the SC sentenced him to death. The aggravating circumstance of relationship. that is a relationship not by blood or affinity. Failure to allege an aggravating circumstance of any nature in the information. The usual penalty that the SC imposes is reclusion perpetua because according to the SC the accused at the time is being deprived of his right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. If you have read the several cases of Echegaray. but by work and it becomes a qualifying circumstance which could make the crime of theft a qualified one. With respect to crimes against persons. But exempting in some respects is inherent. the relationship (although it is not a factor). Even in the case of killing of a person. where all of us know. except for rape which has already become a crime against persons. But then. Relationship between a master and a servant/domestic servant. an ascendant. you will recall. in the event that the person killed is less than 3 days. even if proven during the trial cannot be considered as aggravating for purposes of putting the penalty in its maximum or for offsetting the felony.would merit the imposition of the maximum penalty of death. the crime committed is infanticide. probably you have come across the findings of the court as the exact relationship between Echegaray and Baby. Thus the SC laid down a specific rule: All aggravating circumstances whether ordinary or specific. etc. In regard to theft and crimes against property. it was established that Baby is his own daughter. relationship is always mitigating if the relative do not belong to those who are exempted. qualified or qualifying must be alleged in the information. It was alleged that Baby was his stepdaughter. the penalty that should be imposed is that of Parricide is simply the killing of the spouse. There are other instances where relationship may be considered as qualifying aggravating. that the moment that the person has a high degree of blood relationship or affinity. when suddenly there is a heated argument aroused out of a habitual drunkard and another person. A drunkard or habitual drunkenness should only be considered an aggravating when on occasion of that habitual drunkenness. Under the law/jurisprudence. ascendant of descendant to an ascendant or a descendant or a spouse that aggravates the killing. Do you think that being a habitual drunkard or habitual drunkenness should be considered as an aggravating circumstance? Well. or regulation in order that habitual drunkenness be considered an aggravating circumstance as against him. then he is a habitual drunkard. that person at the time when he is under the control of intoxicating liquor or beverages. The other alternative circumstance is drunkenness. you see. aside from being a habitual drunkard. It is the fact of relationship that makes the crime committed by a spouse. my own opinion. he usually commit violations of the law. When it is simply accidental or incidental when the crime is committed. Unfair eh! Drunkenness sometimes occurs when a person who doesn‘t usually engage drinking habitually or regularly or on occasion. It only adopted the theory that if the person has been frequently taking intoxicating liquors and that when he took those. These particular areas of concerns that we have actually are not very complicated. the person is always committing also a violation of law or a rule or regulation. he was the one challenged. do you mean to tell me that that person is a habitual drunkard? Supposing he does it only once a month or every two weeks? That is why the SC abandoned the theory of regularity in drinking. supposing that the offender is a habitual drunkard. then the habitual drunkard. However. then it is aggravating. So. would you consider his habitual drunkenness an aggravating circumstance? Supposing in that case. There are times when men/women sometimes drink and sometimes do not remember what happened before. if he is not violating any law. that is considered as habitual drunkenness.the crime of parricide is akin to murder irrespective of the presence of any of the aggravating circumstances in Art. . 14 or in Art 248 of the RPC. armed with a knife stabbed the other one. When drunkenness is habitual or purposely sought to embolden the offender in the crime he intended to commit. but he loses control of himself to the point that he cannot distinguish right or wrong/he cannot remember what he has done before. but he is not looking for trouble/any violation of any law. rules. it is simply mitigating. he already loss his reason or control of himself and he cannot anymore remember what he has done at the time when he is under the influence of liquor etc. But even if he is a habitual drunkard. I have an idea about this. would his being a habitual drunkard be considered an aggravating circumstance? I am definitely going to disagree. . what penalty should be imposed to him? An accomplice is entitled to a . They never stepped inside the classroom in their elementary days. You remember the case of the Muslims or the moros. He may create a little problem or trouble by reason of his being drunk. They use their common sense most of the time. is not a justification to kill the other group or members of the other group. even in the Visayan region and in Mindanao. a doctor in cases of reckless imprudence resulting to homicide (which is also a case of malpractice). unless also it is inherent in the commission of the crime. However. because there are some people who are illiterate but really possess a talented mind. Usually a person who is drunk would not do something that is not acceptable to all those who are present. and it is but natural for them to kill their enemy so they won‘t have an enemy later on. There are some illiterates who are better than those who are able to read and write. Lack of degree of education. Being an enemy of another tribe. Not always. If it is not habitual.Anyone who purposely sought drunkenness to embolden himself to commit the crime would naturally be considered as an aggravating circumstance of drunkenness. ―you try what you are going to do when you are drunk. But using your common sense. Do you agree? You have to agree because that is the law. ―Ikaw nga ang malasing. Like for example. we go to Article 16: Who are those criminally liable? Those who are criminally liable for grave felonies are the principals. Illiteracy by itself is not a mitigating circumstance. They say usually in southern tagalong and other places in the are. accomplices and accessories. It must be coupled with lack of understanding of what is wrong and what is right. etc. Say the operation was successful. Those who are criminally liable for light felonies are only the principals and accomplices. group. But it is mala in se. if he does not purposely sought so.. The problem is it is very wrong to kill without any justifiable reason.‖ Meaning. etc.‖ Not only in the southern tagalong. it becomes mitigating circumstance. that is when it is considered as a mitigating circumstance. It is very common to them to resort to that kind of argument. but the patient died. he must be a doctor in order to commit that crime. who claim that they should be given the mitigating circumstance of lack of degree of education. But when it comes to mala in se. do you agree? If a light felony is committed by an offender and he is an accomplice. But in certain cases. some people argue that illiteracy is a mitigating circumstance according to the SC. lack of degree of education is not anymore accepted as a mitigating circumstance. it is always aggravating when the person has taken advantage of his high degree of education. After Article 15. So if it is a light penalty. The one instigated or entrapped is the person who may be prosecuted for the crime prosecuted. it would not have been accomplished. In entrapment. One is the one entrapping the other. The latter raped the girl. Even in the exempting circumstances. there are principals by inducement. one who is instigating the other. hindi rin eh. that is a legal method employed by the law enforcers to catch a person violating the law in the act of committing the same. they are the ones who actually killed the victim.penalty lower by one degree. The instigator is the principal by inducement. you should use your common sense. slight physical injuries. and prizes to induce another to commit a crime. Meaning to say. the penalty is naturally arresto menor up to imprisonment of 30 days? What is one degree lower than this? Wala rin eh!‖ So. One case decided by the SC: One man grabbed and delivered a girl to his friend whom the latter wanted to have sex with. Such is a very generic description of a principal by indispensable cooperation. for purposes of passing or becoming a top-notcher. They are the ones who actually did the commission of the crime. Principal by direct inducement are the people who employ promises. And what is one degree lower from a light penalty? For example. Although if you were asked in the bar exam. rewards. without his participation in the act of the crime. it is supposed to be punished by a light penalty. This is participated by two or more persons. The distinction between instigation and entrapment has been asked three or four times in the bar. may only be exempted if there are principals by inducement. do you agree with the law? I don‘t agree with the law! Even in theft. the crime of rape would not . One is a principal by direct participation. One of the difficult thing to interpret is the principal by indispensable participation. There are three kinds of principals. The one who employed uncontrollable fear or irresistible force are not exempted from criminal liability. You are very familiar by principals by direct participation --.they must be the main actor. There is such a thing as instigation in the commission of a crime --. These principals by direct participation. Article 17 is about Principals. For example. you should answer according to the law. they are liable for being principals by inducement. But if you are asked your honest belief. and in instigation.that is Entrapment. In crimes where instigation was an act which resulted in the commission of the crime. What is the liability of the man who grabbed the girl? If not for him. in killing. the person instigated is exempt from the criminal liability. and the last is by indispensable cooperation. The one instigating the other is a principal by inducement. the other is by inducement. It is actually a matter of concern. but their purpose in committing an act and helping each other in the same purpose. But. the owner of the banca told them. ―shall I wait for you or not?‖ Such is an indication of intention to conspire with the others. but performed simultaneous or prior to the commission of the crime and such participation is not indispensable. and the said owner agreed to do so. You only distinguish the acts of the principals to know if they are inducers. The moment one agrees with the inducer. such is considered conspiracy. such can be considered an exhibition to an agreement to the commission of the crime. Other example is an owner of a motor banca in the middle of night who was approached by a group of men to transport them to their enemy. **Answer of Judge Pimentel: Persons who were challenged. cooperators. There is always conspiracy whenever a person induces another to commit a crime. upon arrival at the place where the enemy will be killed. brought them there (as he is the only boat owner at the place and no other transportation may be utilized by the men) and told them. there is conspiracy. it is already given. you do not distinguish WON there is conspiracy. An accomplice is not a principal whatsoever. It is important to distinguish a principal by indispensable cooperation and an accomplice. ―bahala na kayo!‖ after that. therefore he is a principal by indispensable cooperation. not necessarily to participate in the killing. **Between/amongst principals. etc. Planning prior is not the controlling factor. *Questions of Faye regarding conspiracy… cannot be heard very well. then the crime would not have been committed. Could he be considered a person who has incurred criminal liability and as what? That person by prior or simultaneous act has participated in the crime without necessarily being a principal shall be considered only as an accomplice.have been accomplished. Without him. supposing he knew the purpose of the men. But then. . even without prior agreement to commit a crime. 20 of the RPC (yun lang #2 and #3. My contention is that he is still liable despite the fact that he is the parent of one of the parties. relationship is not an exempting circumstance. (arg. putol yung discussion due to tape reversion) The other two: 1) harboring.D. punishes so whereby said accessory becomes the principal). naturally.**The one who is not most guilty is the principal by indispensable cooperation because he only cooperated and not the one wielded the weapon for killing. There are three kinds of Accessories: first. **The testimony of the principal by indispensable participation (as a state witness) would convict the other principals because with the corroboration of other evidence. If it is in connection with any other crime. But then. particularly those accessories who are exempted from criminal liability under Art. P. etc. if they are charged under a special law. If the property stolen belongs to the son of the one who profited from the commission of the crime and he becomes the dealer of the property stolen from the other son. yung #1 is not exempted from criminal liability). the one who profits from the commission of the crime (a corresponding special law. If the latter poses more danger to society.A. he may become a protector or a coddler under R. concealing. the offender 2) concealing. destroying the effects of the crime. if he can always try to get away with his crimes by paying his way out or give rewards. If it is in connection with drugs. it might fall under the law on obstruction of justice. In the Anti-Fencing Law. #9165. evidence against the others will be very strong. The fact that they are related to one another exempts him to criminal liability should not extend to the one who becomes a fence. the son who stole if from the other son who is living with him is exempted…what happens to the father under the Anti-fencing Law? That is a ticklish issue. I believe they can be successfully prosecuted and later on convicted for violation of the . There are so many who are exempted from being accessories. The most guilty is the principal by inducement. 1612: Anti-Fencing Law. There are two laws that may be involved. These are acts of accessories under Art 19. I have already enumerated those who are exempted. In the interpretation/construing penal laws. It is enshrined in the Constitution here and all over the world. Congressman De Guzman. he committed a misconduct! Imposing a penalty that is not provided for by law is grave coercion! (jokes omitted) Everybody knows Art. if would require criminal intent. The cases involved are the cases of Robin Padilla. It shall only be confined in Art. It has never been changed. De Guzman. while as an accessory under Art 19. When Robin Padilla. and this law was passed. I remember one time when a police general conducted traffic somewhere at Ayala and EDSA. R. How about penalties that may be imposed? The penalties that may be imposed are only those that are provided by law. 22 of the RPC? No.(hard to distinguish). 10 of the RPC. #8294 carries a much lower penalty than what is provided in P. harsh. and Martin Simon. You cannot impose any penalties that is not provided by law.A. #9165. it would not. they are entitled to a retroactive effect of the penal law.A. All penal laws shall have prospective effect. it shall be strictly be construed against the State and in favor of the accused. If you are going to ask me whether we should balance the . The Jaywalking Law provides for a penalty of fine of up to P1. #1866. unusual.special law because that would not require criminal intent. **Judge groans and cracks jokes. 22 of the RPC.D. No other penalty can be imposed!!! You know. *Question of Edcel re the Lacson case…. After catching them. it is beneficial to them. etc. How about the provision in R. he lined them up and ordered them to give him 20 push-ups. He caught several jaywalkers. That has been a time-honored principle. Excessive.000 only. he can be administratively charged for what he imposed. which states that the provision of the RPC shall not have suppletory effect? Would that include Art. and cruel cannot be imposed by the courts. it shall only have retroactive effect if it is favorable to the accused. you just remember the case of People vs. *Read the article of Dean Bocobo in the PDI. I will defend his right to say what he does/believes in is right. whether in the MTC or the prosecutor‘s office. R. So if the pardon was given during the preliminary investigation.D. othe r considerations or right cause. then I disagree . Article 23 of the RPC actually involves pardon by the offended party.interest of the State or not. … Just like Alan Paguia. #6425. that is his problem. R.A. P. not by the State. I cannot defend him. etc. where will we go? Pulutin tayo sa kangkungan nyan eh. the cases of Robin Padilla and Congressman De Guzman. If it turns out he is wrong. etc. *Jo-anne‘s comment that Paguia flunked half the class and passed after appeal. Martin Simon in relation to R.A. qualified seduction. If not one will do so. Some people have their own way of doing things. Judge recounts Paguia‘s goodness to him. #1866. simple seduction. *More regarding Paguia‘s actuations and his reliance to God Almighty. but whether he is wrong or not. that would constitute a valid ground for pardon. Pardon by the offended party may be given in order to be effective in cases of private crimes that cannot be prosecuted de officio prior to the institution of the criminal action in the proper court.A. #8294. he is becoming a character (laughter). #7659. I don‘t think that is a matter to be balanced! If the SC states that just because an accused is menace to the society. *Talk about Fornier being a debater. But there is a condition put down by the SC in jurisprudence: in the event that . I have my own way of doing things… In Article 22 of the RPC. Private Crimes: Acts of lasciviousness. thus. convicted. in no other case can it occur. Are they valid? Such affidavits are not valid to dismiss an information. Her pardon was initially invalid. The first rape occurred when the daughter was less than 18 years of age. But some people insist. ―tang. with the case of the second rape. Before. the pardon given by the minor cannot be effective unless it is in conformity with her parents. After reaching the age of 18. In this case. but it became valid after she became 18 and prior to the institution of the case. She filed two cases of rape against her father. ―kami ang nag-reklamo. the withdrawal of the pardon must be immediately made after she turned 18 years of age. For crimes that can be prosecuted de officio. was the pardon conditional? **Judge: conditional nga!!! But she did not retract so when she became 18. it became a reality before she filed the criminal case.the offended party is a minor. One. How about what is really happening in the court. the daughter said. before rape became a crime against persons. I forgive you now.000. In other words. they should be penalized. Pero nagdahan- . such becomes an effective grant of pardon considering that no criminal case yet has been filed against the father in any proper court. when the girl reached the age of 18 and she did not retract the pardon. But. if you are going to do that again. mas marunong pa kayo?‖ There ought to be a law that when the private complainant withdrew by reason of monetary or other considerations (not because there was no crime committed). This time it is not qualified anymore. The SC acquitted the father with respect to the first rape because although the mother did not conform to the pardon. another case came to mind. I cite these people to contempt and fined them up to P5. in cases of marital rape. I am going to file a case against you. When she filed the case. she was raped again. Her nonwithdrawal of the prior pardon makes so still effective and valid (remember that ha) *Kathy Lo‘s question. the father rape his daughter. At that time. the forgiveness given by the wife may be given any time even if the offender is serving sentence. But. The lower court convicted the father.‖ Such forgiveness was without the consent of the mother. there are only two instance where pardon is allowed. she was already of age. so many are submitting affidavits of desistance. There is only one rape with homicide and the others are considered independent rapes because rape is not amongst those aggravating circumstance enumerated in Art 14 of the RPC. In cases of rape with multiple homicide. that is the only benefit the felon can derive. So. since rape is a crime against persons which can be prosecuted de oficio. would the other accused be benefited by the pardon? No! It used to be the others would benefit because rape was a private crime before. The purpose here is reformation. the other accused cannot be benefited by the marriage. it is really a case-to-case basis. The other confinements are not considered to be like so. Now.dahan na ko kasi mareklamo dito ang tao sa Maynila. ~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: July 16. In preventive imprisonment. shall be considered for purposes of computing the length of service still to be served by the offender. confinement in an asylum or a rehabilitation center. I will dismiss the case. If the accused agreed to marry the victim and the latter agrees as long as she can end off with the goodlooking one. 2003 By: Katherine Faye Darvin . I know I am right because what they do is contemptuous. in the event of conviction. A long story about accounting in a company… if the boss executes an affidavit of desistance. Measures adopted which are not considered as penalties: Preventive imprisonment. the other rapes cannot be aggravating circumstance. the period. according to the SC. The problem here is if the marriage takes place. Pardon by the offended party in multiple rape by several persons. 00 and it is correccional when it is P 6. Same is true with life imprisonment although in some cases the Supreme Court has pronounced that there is no maximum duration of the penalty of life imprisonment but in RA 7659. Why? Because under BP 129. Do not confuse the jurisdictional fine and the fine as a penalty because the fine as a penalty would start from up to P200.FINE (A fine) is afflictive when the fine is more than P 6.00 to P6. guys. more than P 200 but does not exceed P 6000.000.00 is afflictive fine. rule on the jurisdiction of the RTC and MTC with respect to fines hasn‘t been changed.00 is an afflictive. . MTC and MeTC EXCEPT when the penalty is solely a fine.000. Do not confuse the jurisdictional fine for purposes of acquisition of jurisdiction by the 1st level courts and the 2nd level courts. The exclusive jurisdiction of the MCTC. it is within the jurisdiction of the MCTC.000. Naturally. That is up to P 200 is light fine. it specifically provided that the maximum of duration of life imprisonment of life imprisonment is 40 years (did it not say so?) yes it did. beyond that it is already with the RTC.000. It remains to be that the jurisdiction of the first level courts that is the MTC. (ok?!) Article 27 speaks of duration and effects of penalties.00. MTC and MeTC is only up to a fine of P 4. it is either light or correccional but a part of the correccional fine is already within the jurisdiction of the RTC.000. so it is when the correccional fine and we are familiar with the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in so many cases that when the penalty is correccional in nature.00. if the fines are within the jurisdiction of the MTC. as amended by several laws and the Rules of Court. RA 7659 only amended the duration of life imprisonment and reclusion perpetua because the duration of the penalty of reclusion perpetua has been increased from 20 years and 1 day to 40 years from 30 years.00 and it is light when it is P 200 and below. (I‘m not kidding.00 is correccional fine but more than P 6000.00 light penalty. MCTC and MeTC shall be up to a fine of P 4. from P200. he just repeated what he said! In the reverse order!) do not confuse the correccional fines with jurisdictional fines because there is a difference between the two.000.00 but more than P 200.00 correccional penalty and more than P 6. if the death penalty then and up to now is reduced or is commuted to reclusion perpetua. The problem now of course is if you are going to look at the accessory penalties of reclusion perpetua. only up to the duration of the penalty imposed by the court. It should have fixed it in order that there should be no more confusion. which has a duration of from 12 years and 1 day up to 20 years. etc. its accessory penalties or some of its accessory penalties may reach up to perpetual accessory penalties. It should have been amended a long time ago and the appropriate durations should have been fixed by RA 7659. But RA 7659 did not fix the durations of accessory penalties. But the penalty of reclusion perpetua carries with it all the accessory penalties that may be found under the RPC. actually that is more on accessory penalties and even civil interdiction should be up to 40 years. The reason being that it is a special law and special laws do not provide for accessory penalties except in one law that I have come across and that is RA 9165. life imprisonment. there was a problem also when a penalty of death is commuted to reclusion perpetua. they still remain indivisible and for purposes of indeterminate sentence law and for other purposes. Say for example. the general rule is that the accessory penalty is only up to the duration of the actual penalty imposed which is within the range of prision mayor. the penalty of life imprisonment do not carry with it accessory penalties. although prision mayor is. It‘s not only up to 40 years but the accused shall suffer a perpetual accessory penalty or perpetual accessory penalties. The penalty of prision mayor. So. When the duration of reclusion perpetua is only up to a maximum of 30 years of imprisonment. meaning to say that it has a perpetual effect. But. a person who may have been convicted of within the range of reclusion temporal shall suffer perpetual absolute disqualification from any of those enumerations provided for by the law.Now. are there accessory penalties on destierro. actually an afflictive penalty. even the penalty of reclusion temporal. civil interdiction. suspension and light penalties? Are there? Destierro? There is none. This has bee our problem because the law has not yet been amended. Despite the duration of the penalties of reclusion perpetua. The same is true in prision correccional and arresto mayor. Arresto mayor? Well. the duration of the penalty should be up to 40 years. etc. On the other hand. the accessory penalties of reclusion perpetua is perpetual in nature. Suspension? There is none. including of that of parole or commutation of sentence sometimes. The same is true with respect to . The records of the case must be complete if a person has been arrested. What are the evidence that would prove that he is already at the disposal of the authorities? When the court issues a commitment order on final sentence. There are instances where naturally the penalties are to be computed. . still he cannot exercise certain rights because at that time. The two must concur. He would then be at the disposal of the authorities. Why? Because the one cannot exercise some of his rights while he is actually incarcerated in jail.arresto menor. the penalty shall or the duration of the penalty shall be computed from the time that he is placed at the disposal of the authorities and when does a person convicted of a crime is placed under the disposal of the authorities? When? Meaning to say that the judgment has become final and executory and he is already at the disposal of the authorities. when do you start computing the penalty that should be served by the offender? It shall be computed from the day of final judgment. he is prevented from doing so because he is serving sentence. 1) commitment during the pendency of the trial. the duty of the court is to issue a commitment order during the pendency of the case. If the accused has been sentenced and the judgment has become final and executory. For purposes of computing the penalty for those who are already under detention or preventive imprisonment. Usually. If you are asked a question what is the meaning of mittimus? It is a commitment order issued by the court for the accused to serve his sentence by virtue of a final judgment. Well he is the disposal of the authorities when actually there is already a return of the warrant of arrest or a return showing that the accused was already arrested and already confined in jail or when the accused has already voluntarily surrendered to the court. He is already at the disposal of the … that the judgment has already been final and executory and that he is at the disposal of the authorities. If he is already under detention or he is already a detention prisoner. they cannot post bail? Or that the court prohibits the posting of bail? That is a commitment during the pendency of appeal. that is already the mittimus or a commitment by virtue of a final judgment. how about those who appealed and they are still in prison. Even if he is serving his sentence in his own residence. There are several kinds of commitment orders which are not exactly a mittimus. what is the term being used by the prison authorities for that commitment on final sentence? That is called MITTIMUS. If he is not a detention prisoner. they did not commit any wrong or any crime. it has also some effect in the government because if the accused is convicted and upon being committed to a detention center. Ex. If you are a private prosecutor you must ask a judge to issue a commitment order during the pendency of the case. what would be credited to him is only a period of 4 years. the only advantage of agreeing to be treated as a convicted prisoner is that in the event that the person is convicted. But those who do not agree to be treated as convicted prisoners can sleep whole day. they shall be entitled to be paid a sort of ―disturbance payment‖ in the form of P 10. you will xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx authorities How about preventive imprisonments? Preventive imprisonments have some effects especially in computing the penalties in the event that the accused is convicted. In the event that the accused is convicted. . When you are a private prosecutor. he shall be entitled only to 4/5 of the period his preventive imprisonment. Naturally if the detention prisoner is amenable to being treated as a convicted prisoner. Why? Well. wala sa amin yan eh!‖) It is important. He will not be given the entire years. never mind if you are for the accused.Are you familiar now with these several commitments? They are evidence that the accused is already at the hands of the authorities. he shall be entitled to a full credit of the period of his detention. do not assert the issuance of that commitment order. his period of detention shall be credited to him in whole. The authorities cannot anymore claim: ―di. he will be performing duties which are supposed to be performed only by convicted prisoners. he agreed with the jail warded that he is to be treated as a convicted prisoner. The only effect. How about all those people who were not convicted but they suffered preventive imprisonment? It depends upon the reason for their acquittal. If the reason for their acquittal was that they are innocent. if it is 5 years as a detention prisoner. If however he is not amenable to be treated as a convicted prisoner.000/year of imprisonment. They won‘t be assigned any duties. suspension from public office or civil interdiction and bond to keep the peace. So I called them up to accommodate this people. if they complain. If however. Otherwise I said. it will institute a case of indirect contempt against the manager of the corporation.) …it first should be coursed through the department of justice. But the guy said. The matter is now with the Supreme Court I believe will determine if that person is eligible to become the mayor of that town or not. he is accepted for probation. What is important here is the perpetual absolute disqualification of suffrage. He will be restored to all his civil rights and that includes his political rights. he shall suffer perpetual absolute disqualification to vote and be voted upon. when he won the election. Effects of penalties: perpetual. So they were forced.000. It is actually not really a big issue if the person has been .00/ year for their 10-year incarceration. then the moment that the probation is terminated. etc and that it would depend upon the availability of funds and that they would have to follow it up with the DBM. farinas transit refused to accommodate them despite the fact that they already have the passes from the bureau of prisons. That is when he served his sentence. absolute disqualifications from holding office from being elected to any office or to vote and be voted upon. at the instance of the court. And therefore I am already restored to all my civil and political rights. Under Book One of the RPC. he shall also be restored to all his civil rights. temporary.(here Judge told the story of the 2 innocent people who were sent to jail just because they ran side by side in the direction where the accused is also running) (Judge ordered for the two innocent people that were convicted to be paid P 10. if a person is sentenced to a penalty of more than 18 months. (continuation of story) but when they were about to leave. they terminated my probation before I assumed office. Do you recall a newspaper article that a mayor is being asked to be disqualified to sit as a mayor on the ground that he is under probation when he ran for public office? But he won despite the fact that he is under probation. That is the benefit of one who will be undergoing probation. when he failed to appeal because he choose to jump bail and resort to hiding because he escaped… There could be valid reasons for his escape because if you read the case of Go v. irrespective of the penalty imposed. before you can be released.given a pardon by the President. There is no preliminary investigation yet and yet he is asked to post a bail. CA. In RA 9165. xxx (tape screeches then stops) SIDE B (I think this is the story of rolito go) xxxxx When he was sentenced with finality to serve a penalty of reclusion perpetua. what we only know in probation is that when the probation is terminated by the court. . who will not be afraid? The arrest of Go is illegal. He cannot dispose of his property nor manage the same. No problem. The preliminary investigation is illegal. not the court! That is again a first in the history of preliminary investigations that the court is the one already ordering the accused to post bail without the accused asking for it. The pre-trial is illegal. when a person is suffering from civil interdiction. which occurred is illegal and the SC has declared all of it as illegal but the SC said: Go. the offender shall suffer only certain portions of civil interdiction. Go. But here. But let‘s see what is the decision of the SC in that case. post a bail. What I understand in criminal procedure is that it should be the accused who should request to post a bail before undergoing preliminary investigation. Isn‘t that correct in your crim pro? Not the prosecutor. maybe it was an oversight but maybe it was purposely omitted by the one whoa authored the law and the researcher. the offender is restored to all his civil rights. He will not have parental authority. But the law did not say that he will suffer the loss of marital authority if he violates any of the provisions of RA 9156. All struck against him. The trial. you have to undergo preliminary investigation and directed the provincial prosecutor of Rizal to conduct preliminary investigation but meanwhile the SC said Mr. And as I have already said to my students in special proceeding. maybe because afraid of bad publicity or afraid of adverse comments. Ramos they made a boo-boo when the office of the President granted a pardon to a person whose judgment has not yet attained finality. It is an act of liberality on the part of the President that has already been extended to another person and therefore the president is bound by his acts. I mean. that is all there is to it. are you going to argue with me? Then argue with some other people not me. we should not threaten them by flunking them or by not allowing them to graduate or whatever… you see those are things that are not supposed to be done… I don‘t know if that‘s alright with them. the decision convicting the accused must have become final and executory. I already gave him my pardon. ok) How about pardons that were extended by the President? Can they be recalled or revoked? How about if it is absolute pardon? Can the President recall? Hindi na. I have my own way of doing things. atty. To me it‘s not alright with me. students who don‘t deserve to be in the college of law and we have to flunk them? Well I was telling them. no matter what the public will say I already said my piece. And now he will suffer about 22 or 20 years more years of imprisonment. And somebody went to the SC questioning and the SC has to dress-down the chairman of the board of pardons and parole. that is his ―the end. your selection of the students who goes to your school is very poor if we are going to do that. Despite the fact that he has already been in jail for . Naturally. Paguia will not have a problem anymore.. Important: this is the part where Judge impliedly states that it‘s not his style to fail students: (Judge is telling the story about the ―flunking‖ of students – ½.. wala nang maraming gulo. mean. Erap withdraw the pardon to the guy. etc and all others concerned that they should first determine whether the judgment has become final and executory before they recommend to the President that a person be granted pardon. We should teach them. You can just imagine. or the comments already being made by several people. I said: (Judge said) do you think that you will be creating a good image? That means that you have accepted poor students.‖ And also. Let‘s see. if I am the President.Pardon by the President. whose conviction has not yet attained finality. etc. or even ¾ of the class… ‗we will be creating a good image‘. If he will do that probably he will be disqualified from running for public office. During the tome of Pres. So Erap should be found guilty be first and not appeal and just ask pardon and let‘s be done with it… para tapos na. I am nit the right person to argue with. But then during the time of Erap in the case of Manero. before the President of the Philippines could grant pardon. Are you going to tell me that those people who screen those people who will be granted pardon did not do their job? Sila ang wag mong bigyan ng pardon. We are in cost and now we will go to pecuniary liabilities. Subsidiary penalties are only available when the penalty includes a fine in itself and the penalty is not beyond prision correccional. But if it is prision correccional. the subsidiary penalty in case there is a fine paid cannot .5 million and whole amount in the civil case of about $3 million. Alright. indemnification of damages. We should not give them any privilege at all. And therefore the President has all the right to revoke it. what would be the severest penalty that can be imposed as a correccional penalty which shall include fine? How many months? How many years? Did the law say so? What did the law says? In such an event. indemnities. that is the principle there that has to be understood. Conditional there should be no problem because anytime if the President is displeased with the acts being committed by the grantee. Pecuniary liabilities will consist of reparation of the damage caused. they billed OJ in the criminal case ½ I believe of the costs which would amounts to $25. That would include costs. etc.. Say for example. Sa Philippines magkano lang costs? P2. Despite the fact that they have the capacity to pay. if it is absolute.the last 17 years or more or 23 years… to my mind when a President extends pardon. whether fixed or alternative in nature.00. Fees. And if one violates any provisions of that contract. are considered as costs. Because the office of the President has all the means to discover if there is fraud. the costs are prohibitive in litigation. it depends if in computing the subsidiary penalty it will reach the maximum of prision correccional. Well it is only in this country that costs are at its minimum.000. In other countries. That is my idea. the penalty imposed is up to 3 years. all that he has to do is revoke because that is a contract between the President and the person given a conditional pardon. Do not confuse subsidiary penalties from preventive imprisonment. the contract becomes ineffective. because he was acquitted on grounds of reasonable doubt and he was also found liable civilly. subsidiary penalties.500. In the event that the penalty is imprisonment and fine and the imprisonment is correccional in nature. no recall even if there is fraud. As I told you the costs that were… Where is OJ Simpson tried? New York? Or California? California no? They billed OJ. and whoever pays costs? Hudas not pay? Most of those convicted do not pay. the subsidiary penalty shall not increase 1/3 of the penalty that was imposed. now. P 2.00. indemnification of consequential damages including costs and others. Remember that. Arresto menor. the accessory penalties are only inherent to those with respect to death. But that was since 1968. From their own beef barrels. in the event that it is solely a fine. It is high time now that they amend it. if you look at your book. she might take it as a political gimmick of which I am never engaged in such an activity. prision mayor and prision correccional. the penalties that carry with it civil interdiction are only those that have been commuted from death to reclusion perpetua or penalty of reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal. are only supposed to attach to the penalties during the duration of the actual penalties imposed in the maximum. reclusion perpetua. Same is true with prision correccional. . civil interdiction do not attach. Ako if I write our Congresswoman. somebody should write your Congressman to amend the law. Not the entire range of prision mayor. No. the penalties were. You should remember that. Now. from then on. Well. The people in Congress forgot amount subsidiary imprisonment because they could all pay the fine. Arresto mayor. they can pay. It‘s actually for not only practical but for the benefit of those people who may be imprisoned because of poverty. what should be the subsidiary penalty? In case it is solely a fine. it shall not exceed 6 months. death which has been commuted to reclusion perpetua not life imprisonment ha!. the subsidiary penalty irrespective of the amount even if it is a Billion peso or what you see in (RA) 9165 up to 550 million pesos. pork barrels. no. prision correccional and arresto. Other than those penalties. dog barrels or whatever. that particular provision fixing the amount of subsidiary penalty etc or subsidiary imprisonment was actually an amended to the minimum wage then of P4 which was increased to P8 in 1968.exceed 1 year because it is within the range of 1/3. reclusion temporal. Dapat everybody should write their Congressman not just because for the heck of it or you want to tell your Congressman that you know the law. Now. how much is the minimum wage now in Metro Manila? P 250? Ang laki non from P8. the accessory penalties in cases of prision mayor. the subsidiary imprisonment cannot. But in no case in the event that the only penalty is a fine. but then with respect to accessory penalties of civil interdiction. she might not take it as a good advice. irrespective of the amount cannot exceed 6 months. Kayang-kaya magbayad ng fine eh. And you know of course that subsidiary imprisonment or penalty shall be computed at P8/day of imprisonment. She might not take it as a good advice. the law was not anymore amended. So if what was imposed is prision mayor minimum. that is from 6 years and 1 day to 8 years. the period of the accessory penalty is only up to 8 years only. it shall be forfeited in favor of the government of the Republic of the Philippines but it cannot be destroyed if such property can still be the subject of usage of the citizen of that country if it is still within the commerce of man. VCDs. forfeiture and confiscation or confiscation and forfeiture. naturally. But if it is beyond the commerce of man. then it shall be forfeited in favor of the government of the Philippines. fake CD‘s. Even this uka-ukay. Can your argument hold? No. then it shall be destroyed. if those fake CDs have been confiscated. even if it could be used but it is beyond the commerce of man. . Whether it belongs to anyone. Save for example.same is true with arresto mayor. If the firearm is used in the commission of a crime. it must be shown that the offender. And the Salvation Army is a non-governmental institution? Charitable institution? Where are the money going? (this is the ukay-ukay story) so are they contrabands? Can they be forfeited in favor of the government of the republic? There was a time that it was prohibited. If it is a contraband. If the owner knew that that particular licensed property will be used by the offender in the commission of the crime. it is still to be forfeited even if it can still be the subject of commerce. political and other rights. can it be subject to a forfeiture? No? But then if the property is only possessed by the owner by reason of a permit or a privilege. Question: If an instrument is used in the commission of the crime but it belongs to a third person. can you claim that you bought it with your own money and you earned that money from a legitimate source. even if he uses a firearm belonging to another must actually have used the same with the knowledge of the owner. it could be destroyed. I was made to understand from those who know that it came from the Salvation Army and it is the Salvation Army who‘s selling them. We are aware that instruments used in the commission of the crime are subject to forfeitures. no problem. Because there is an unlawful commerce such as the sale of this CDs. But then that word commerce is rather confusing. and never mind arresto menor because arresto menor is so temporary. tapes. After getting out. It must be lawful commerce. Now. it is automatic that he is restored to all his civil. 20 days up to 30 days. For example. a firearm. is it automatic that it shall be forfeited in favor of the government even if it belongs to a third person? No. whathaveyou. can it be forfeited in favor of the government of the Republic of the Philippines? Such as a gun. the possession of a firearm is a mere privilege because you are being issued a license. just wait for 10 days. Now you can‘t control it anymore. The problem is. any person who have an interest over the property such as an heir. The property shall revert back to the estate. They were caught with a 48 inch flat TV. we cannot dispose of it and its occupying a lot of space. What Reversions in spec pro. I now have a problem. a Russian who acquired properties in the Philippines. the access device law. That is reversion. but the store refused to accept it saying that it was not bought in that store. then you can fine a separate action for escheat proceedings against the owner. Can we forfeit it in favor of the government? Hindi because it belongs to a private individual who is not in conspiracy with the people in the use of a falsified or a forged credit card. A Taiwanese was caught manufacturing fictitious cards or embossing with an embossing machine. Properties that were used as a greenhouse or property where plant sources of dangerous drugs are cultured. the order being final and executory. The TV set is there. you sold him your property. when the deceased left no will. These shall be forfeited in favor of the government of the Republic of the Philippines. You name it. The proceedings may be impliedly instituted in the criminal case.There are properties that maybe subject to forfeiture which is different from escheat proceedings under the special proceedings. So we asked the manufacturer to determine to which establishment that TV was delivered but the manufacturer refused. an escheat proceeding with the proper court so that the property will be privately owned by the government. Escheats. we cannot use it. without asking for his citizenship. But it is not forfeiture. fictitious credit cards. What happens to the property that you sold? It will also be subject of escheat in the manner of reversion proceedings. He has his own lawyers who revealed the secret of the peace officer…. has a period of 5 years within which to bring an action to recover that property which was given to the government within 5 years from the date of its delivery to the government. Remember that. what did them in is that they bought several appliances from several stores almost daily. And that well. There are so many kinds of forfeiture proceedings. Since the time of Krivenko. But if it is not established in the criminal action. Actually two problems regarding properties belonging to private individuals. You have a property in Makati. . after the guy was convicted. As a matter of fact. he has it. the office of the Solicitor General should file. A Taiwanese went to see you. we tried to return the TV to the store where they allegedly bought it. left no heir. And they sell those appliances at a very very low price. It turns out that he is actually a Taiwan citizen and he cannot own any real property in the Philippines. So it is a dilemma for us. It shall be owned by the government in its private capacity. Another dilemma for us is a PNP police officer who was using his big bike for extortion activities. Private yon non public. A case of violation of RA 8484. illegal possession of firearms as we know has been absorbed in the commission of the crime of murder or homicide. It shall only serve as a special aggravating circumstance. Even sometimes other crimes can be complex with another as long as it is a necessary means of committing the other unless that particular act which is also a crime is already absorbed in the commission of the crime. carnapping may be absorbed in rebellion because these rebels must have to use transportation in order that they can move from one place to another.~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: 21 July 2003 By: Mildred Joy Que COMPLEX CRIMES The complex crime proper is actually the commission of a crime which is a necessary means of committing another and a compound crime is a commission of a single act that results into two or more grave or less grave felonies. You will note that the complex crime proper only says that an act may be or is a necessary means of committing another such as what falsification etc which is a means to commit estafa thus the crime committed is estafa through falsification of commercial or private documents. But there are crimes that are absorbed in several crimes of which their absorption to those crimes do not even affect either modify or whatever the crime that has been committed such as rebellion. Even piracy may be absorbed in the crime of rebellion. Such as what? Do you know of any crime or offense that has been already absorbed in another crime despite the fact that it is actually a separate crime in itself and it is not even sometimes a necessary means of committing the other. Well. A special complex crime is one that has been specifically designated by law as such. . Hernandez. naturally the possession of firearms etc and everything maybe also absorbed in the crime of treason. Now. Salazar and such other cases. must the act that is a necessary means. That is actually a compound crime but the problem here is does a complex crime proper follows the principle in compound crime? Meaning. Now the only crimes that cannot be absorbed in the crime of rebellion are naturally private crimes or those crimes that involve chastity which may however been transferred to crime against persons but by the very nature of the crime itself it cannot be absorbed in the crime of rebellion.Definitely illegal possession of firearms is absolutely absorbed in the crime of rebellion but that was since the time of People v. . Rebellion being a continuous crime it may absorb so many crimes such as theft etc. a person shot another and then of course it resulted into double homicide. But. in crimes of treason. That is as far as it can go. There are other crimes necessary in order to commit other crimes. this absorption theory only goes as far as the crime that was committed is a necessary means also of committing the other. Enrile v. Say for example. There is no jurisprudence that will explain whether it adopts the principle of compound crime. must the crime that is a necessary means of committing the other crime must also be a less grave or a grave felony? Does it follow? Because only the compound crime specifically provides that the single act must have resulted into two or more less grave or grave felonies but in complex crime proper did the law state that the crime that was committed which is a necessary means of committing another crime must also be a less grave or grave felony and that the resulting crime must also be a less grave or a grave felony? There is no such provision. The reason being that during actual hostilities or in times of war one must have to possess firearms or other similar instruments in order that they maybe able to succeed in their purpose but definitely in some crimes you cannot consider them as absorbed in the crime of treason. it resulted into homicide and serious physical injuries. Now in compound crime it is simply a single act resulting into two or more less grave or grave felonies. . one of the resulting acts or one of the acts that was the result of a single act or one of the crimes that resulted out of a single act is a light felony. that on occasion of the carnapping. the accused there will have to be arraigned again. it would appear to me that the same principle will apply in compound crime. I will give you an example of which probably you did not realize that it applies only to specific persons. And there will be multiplicity of suits. In that it cannot apply to any other persons other than those mentioned by the law. The third complex crime is the special complex crime. by simple understanding of the laws on complex crime. Although it may seem impractical. this special complex crime only refers to specific victims and specific offenders and specific acts. the government will be spending so much effort and money in prosecuting only a reckless imprudence resulting only to a slight physical injury case. in complex crime which is actually a compound crime the Supreme Court in disposing of a case involving a reckless imprudence which is a single act and it resulted to so many things. The reason being that the single act resulted into shall we call it. You all know that under republic act 7659 amending the law on carnapping that is 6958 or something like that. Although the accused will not be placed in double jeopardy yet it would result to multiplicity of suits which is being avoided actually by the rules of court yet the Supreme Court said file a slight physical injury case. the owner or any occupant of the vehicle. What was the decision of the Supreme Court there? The Supreme Court said that the crime of reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical injuries cannot be included in the complex crimes of reckless imprudence resulting to homicide etc up to the serious physical injuries. damage to property. there could be a carnapping with homicide. A special complex crime of carnapping with homicide. the presentation of evidence in the other case will be the same presentation of evidence in this slight physical injury case especially the testimonies of witnesses. less serious physical injuries and slight physical injuries because one of the victim was able to jump from the vehicle while it was about to plunge into a deep ravine. The Supreme Court ordered that the crime of reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical injuries which resulted out of that particular compound crime should be instituted separately and prosecuted separately and decided separately from the rest. the testimony of the police officer etc.However. So. Well. because the prosecutor will have to prepare another information or complaint.multiple homicide. the victim must either be the following: the driver. then. If say for example the . the law provides only for specific victims. he suffered only slight physical injuries. multiple serious physical injuries. that is the present situation now in relation to compound crimes. My gosh. in order that there could be a special complex crime of carnapping with homicide. But then. But then. He was able to jump. there is . the rape is only incidental to the crime of robbery. said I‘m going to rape that woman after I have robbed her. Now. let us discuss first other kinds of complex crimes. I think this is the first time that this matter has been brought to your attention. let us say for example. in the crime of robbery with rape. If you burn a building in order to kill a person. that is a particular complex crime of which the victims have already been predetermined by law. There are other principles that you have to know in relation to this. But with the passage of RA 7659. robbery with homicide. It is a separate crime of robbery and a separate crime of rape because there are two criminal intents already present in the mind of the offender. special complex crimes. that is not a complex crime of robbery with rape. in robbery with homicide. If you burn a building and a person dies. the crime of robbery with homicide is committed. In arson. Let us go to arson before I go to robbery with homicide etc. now is that a complex crime of robbery with rape? No. So you see. what happens? Any victim whether it is committed as a means to commit the robbery or on occasion thereof . There was none. In all the other cases. Any other victim that is not within those enumerated by law cannot be considered to be complex with the crime of carnapping. you do not know that that person is present only the crime of arson is committed. he will commit rape. the main purpose of the offender is to commit robbery. or by reason thereof. that he will commit both crimes. it has changed the complex crime principle in regard to arson because in the old rule. the two shall be separately prosecuted from each other. and of course certain developments in these particular crimes. There are times when an offender aside from having decided to rob a woman. But. The crime of robbery should be an independent crime to be prosecuted separately and the rape should be an independent crime to be separately prosecuted and they cannot be complexed with each other because the offender has already decided prior to the commission of both. rape was actually only an after thought during the commission of the robbery unless of course you will note that if the offender has already determined that aside from the robbery that he is going to commit. it used to be that there is no complex crime of arson with homicide. there could be no carnapping with homicide.victim during the carnapping is a person who is a bystander or one who was just trying the help the victim or even a policeman who was trying to prevent the carnapping. then that is murder with the use of fire. The carnapping will be separately prosecuted from the crime of homicide or murder or homicide with direct assault or murder with direct assault. I mean. I mean the employer of two of them. Let me put it this way. he will be already out of being sentenced to death. it was explained by their leader that the place where the robbery will take place is the residence of their former employer. the conspiracy and second. that if ever a patrol car or a mobile car or barangay tanods or other law enforcement agents or suspicious looking persons pass by. one of them who is not familiar with the place was designated as a lookout and the lookout will only give a signal while he is in a sari-sari store probably smoking a pack of cigarettes or drinking a bottle of coke or whatever. Now. we forget them on the roof. The only penalty that can be imposed upon him is reclusion perpetua. allowed them to enter. may depend upon first. The penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. the moment he pleads guilty. there is one. supposing that three persons agreed to commit the crime of robbery. But during the entry of the two men after they knock at the front gate. So. he was a newly hired houseboy. the participants in the crime of robbery with homicide. it may depend upon the place where the crime is to committed. if you are the lawyer of a person accused of arson with homicide. asked them to enter. Some of them are on the roof. she said. it was the maid who opened the gate and knowing the two as they were the former painters of the house. that is murder. what would happen? Naturally if there would be a conspiracy. The two are familiar with the place. Shall! On the other hand. he will give the signal to his cohorts or to his friends. Why. So. the two armed with screwdrivers and an ice peak stabbed the maid more than 15 times. you saved his life. The crime of robbery with homicide. While he was . she died on the spot. They discussed that usually the owner of the house leaves before 8 am to go to his work and the only person being left behind is the maid. you burn his house to kill him. But after the maid closed the gate. One is not familiar with the place. Even if the offender does not know the presence of a person but he burned a building resulting to the death of that person. because the law says that the penalty shall be death. has different phases. there is a possibility that there will be an employment of force or violence which may even result to the death of the maid or any other person who may be present at the house of the offended party. So the maid believed them.no complex crime in regard to arson. It so happens that another person was then present in the vicinity. if your intention is to kill your victim. we left some tools or equipments and we want to get them. But it was actually a mistake. And the worst part of it is that the penalty is worse than murder. They were the house painters of the place to be robbed. SO this law was passed without actually the congress realizing the gravity of their mistake. there is a complex crime of arson with homicide. Supposing further that in the agreement. what are you doing here? Well. ask him to plea bargain and enter a plea of guilty to murder. nothing more. they arrested the three. knowing that the owner will not return in a year or two. He claims. would you impose the same penalty to those who actually killed the vagrant in a case of robbery with homicide or would you impose only a penalty for the crime of robbery against the one who is a lookout? The answer is yes because the lookout has agreed only to commit robbery with force upon things and not with force. So he was actually also meted out the penalty of reclusion perpetua. I did not even agreed to have her killed so I should be sentenced only for the crime of robbery. violence or intimidation upon persons. the house that they robbers agreed to rob is an uninhabited house. in the . But while on their way to Tondo passing by Del Pan bridge. you are equally liable with the rest of your companions. the lookout. Say for example. nothing less. I agreed that there be a robber y in a place that is inhabited but I never said that I agreed that they should kill the maid. accosted the three and after hearing from the radio that a robbery took place in Makati. he died. the same circumstances however took place. may be the owner has left for the United States or has left for other places. the two are designated to rob. ―I did not participate in the killing. then in the event that death occurs during the robbery by the employment of force or violence.about to help the girl. So. If the lookout can establish that their agreement is simply that they will rob an uninhabited house and it was established that that person who was present at the place which was robbed is a vagrant and no one knows that such person is present thereat. The problem now is naturally all of them will have to be charged of robbery with homicide. they killed the vagrant. the two assaulted him also and stabbed him several times. The two after trial were convicted sentenced to reclusion perpetua. So. one was designated as a lookout.‖ His appeal went to the Supreme Court but the Supreme Court said. the police officers noted that there are wires dangling from the compartment so they became suspicious. Let us say for example that the robbers were able to enter. jewelry and appliances. the things that they want to get were carted away by them and the one who was appointed as lookout called a taxi cab and they placed the goods inside the taxi cab of course they were able to get money. violence or intimidation. three of those persons decided to rob the house. Only one appealed. meaning to say an abandoned house. he left antiques or other valuable goods inside after locking them with the intention of returning later maybe about a year or two. suddenly they saw a scavenger or if not maybe a vagrant who usually inhabits abandoned buildings or uninhabited buildings and because the two do not want any witness to what they are going to do or to what they have done. the moment that you agree to commit a robbery on a place where there is a possibility that you have to or your companions have to employ force. ladies and gentlemen. But this may change if the circumstances would be different. All that I know is that there is a maid that is being left behind and therefore. even if you are only a lookout. So. the maid would probably be tied only or whatever. they did not appeal. the robbery went on smoothly etc. the only problem is that there could be so many side issues. in special complex crimes the law fixes already a specific penalty for that special complex crime. Would that charge be correct? The charge is actually incorrect. That is the first rape. The prosecutor sometimes charges only one crime. she will be raped several times by the abductor. The other rapes for every sexual intercourse that the offender had with the victim. very interesting. If the examiner is an imaginative examiner. However. such would be the answer. The prosecutor did not study his criminal law as there could only be one abduction with rape. well we actually have plenty of them such as abduction with rape. You have to be careful whether the facts actually are very clear enough that you may be able to understand whether the agreement actually is about robbery with force upon things or robbery with force. The Supreme Court in its recent cases. The succeeding rapes are different crimes of rape and neither can the other rapes be considered as other aggravating circumstances or as an aggravating circumstance as held in previous cases. You know of course that in complex crimes especially if it is a means of committing another or it is a compound crime. the penalty shall be for the more serious crime of the two or all of them. in its recent decisions came to realize that rape is not among the aggravating circumstances enumerated in article 14.abduction with multiple rape. Sometimes we doubt even the answer that we prepared. So it did not aggravate the first abduction with rape or the abduction with rape. there could be so many things that may be asked in criminal law. that is the rule even in complex crimes. even during the times when we attend the meeting after the bar examinations in order . very. You have to be careful now because you are in your fourth year in trying to understand criminal law because this is one of the more difficult subjects. There are other complex crimes. So you see now the difference. Oh yeah. it is a separate and distinct crime of rape. Yes. But you see there are instances where after the woman has been abducted.event that such a scenario is brought to your attention in a question in the bar examinations. he could propound questions that probably even himself may not be able to answer the question. Yes. we have had that experience. violence or intimidation upon persons because the liabilities of the offenders there who may have participated differently from each other are also different from each other. Although it is very interesting. they saw the maid and the house boy.to answer the questions. he will only be held guilty of the crime of robbery because that would be considered as almost akin to spontaneous desistance which is an absolutory cause under article 12 of RPC. Even though he attempted to prevent the killing of the maid but he was not successful? Well if there is already an attempt on his part and he exerted all efforts in order to prevent the commission of homicide. Sir. if at the time that they are going to execute what has been decided in the conspiracy but one desisted. for the first homicide. Yes. They agreed that to beat up and tie the persons in the house. then he cannot be held criminally liable for . one said that the agreement was only to tie them up so he decided to let the houseboy escape. First they tied them up but the two decided to kill the maid and the houseboy. nevertheless the crime of homicide was committed by the others. But then when the robbing incident took place. They succeeded in killing the maid which was vehemently opposed by one of the robbers so when they were about to kill the houseboy. in that example can you not say that there was conspiracy on that part between them? Even if there is conspiracy. So you would see that there is a correct answer. So. most of us do not agree to the question that should be adopted by the examiner. judge in imposing the penalty should it be the penalty for robbery with homicide? Yes. Ty? There are 3 individuals they entered into a conspiracy to rob an inhabited place. But usually the alternative answer would have a lesser percentage than the correct answer and then the second alternative answer will have a lesser also percentage but then you still get some points. Mr. there is an alternative answer and there is a second alternative answer. You can agree to rape. That is an absolutory cause. you remember that? Former senator Santiago who was then a BID commissioner. then you are exempted from criminal liability. you already went there inside etc…but at the last moment. The Supreme Court there in deciding the case used the concept of one criminal intent. then there is only one crime of theft and therefore the accused should be sentenced only for one single crime of theft. So you see. those fighting cocks are not so expensive as the fighting cocks of today but yet it reached the Supreme Court on a legal issue of whether the accused maybe convicted of five separate thefts or only one theft. When you say continuing crimes you have to differentiate it from continuous crimes because a continuing crime as held by the Supreme Court in some cases requires only one criminal intent.the crime through which he desisted. Now the Supreme Court however came up with another decision in relation to this. Even if you prepared already all the instruments. I think about 30 to 40 times. halos isa lang pangalan eh. hindi ako papayag but then you have to resist or if not resist you have to raise your objection in such a manner that it is not a token objection. you can agree to whatever and you can even go to the place where you are going to do it but then at the last moment you desisted when you are still in the subjective phase wherein you have still control over your actions and that you desisted at the final moment. Why? Because conspiracy by itself is not punishable by law. Do you know that we are being pestered with the issuance of clearances for several times. bombays. hindi pwede yan. these Indians. Ang hirap pa naman nitong mga Bombay noh. granted Filipino citizenship by way of administrative proceedings to 34 Indians. the continuous crimes and then you have the transitory crimes and thereafter we will go to computation of penalties etc… just a simple computation in order that you may be able to have a working knowledge on how to compute penalties. One single theft. during those times. Let‘s take a break and then we will go to continuing crimes or delito continuado. The Supreme Court said that although the owners of the fighting cocks are five different people but there being only one criminal intent in the commission of a felony. In the case of Santiago v. The first case that was cited in a law book about a continuing crime or a delito continuado is the case of a thief who stole five fighting cocks that were tied at the side of the street belonging to different owners and the thief was charged of five separate crimes of theft. The name of . Sandiganbayan or Garchitorena. you can agree to murder. It must be a serious objection or a resistance to the commission of the act that you have conspired to commit otherwise you are still criminally liable. maybe I have been saying it already but it could happen that it is debatable sometimes that certain special laws may require criminal intent and some may not. And I said. That is a general rule. if it is mala prohibita. we have to honor whatever decisions that was promulgated by the SC. simply put it was stated therein that one caused undue injury to another etc. But the Supreme Court said that being only one criminal intent etc. Well that is already a decision of the SC. she went to the Supreme Court and challenged the filing of 34 informations against her contending that the act if ever that she committed is a delito continuado or a continuing crime and there is only one criminal intent that may be imputed against her in the event that indeed she caused undue injury to the government. (I‘m not sure of the spelling but it sounds like that) Recently. ask him to get a certification from the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation that he is a legitimate alien who is actually either residing in the Philippines and given a permanent residency status. What you have to do is this. the other one is homicide. except when the special law uses the word knowingly. But if there is no such word.ah only one information should be filed against her. One is rape. But basically. A law that is malum prohibitum. I told my branch clerk Tony. The SC agreed with her and ordered the prosecutor to dismiss all the cases and refile only one information. Otherwise if he has been only given a visitor‘s visa. look the better position to take is simple. the others are estafa etc.. why should we give you a clearance? So. because we are being pestered with clearances. you will ask for a clearance. all offenses in violation of special laws do not require criminal intent. as I was saying. But I was thinking along the line of RA 3019 being a special law. do not issue any clearance. Before she could be arraigned. that is different. criminal intent is not suppose to enter into the picture and therefore the filing of 34 informations are correct. Nevertheless. why should we give him a clearance? There is no point eh if you are only a visitor. IF a law is mala prohibita. does criminal intent have any business in the determination of whether you have criminal intent or not? So.all those who are asking for clearances is the same. because there would be chaos unless we honor their decisions. will you please enter my chambers. we do not know whether actually we are giving a clearance to the offender or not. because there had been so many cases that were filed in our courts and in several courts. Continuous crimes refer to crimes that are even committed only for the first time but then the offender continues to commit the same unless he has already served the . Manhitching. Commissioner Santiago then was charged of 34 counts of violating section 3e of RA 3019. Now. Ok? Because if there is a word that the offender knowingly causes undue injury. then there must be there a criminal intent.. Ramos and companion cases. So you have a problem with syndicated estafa this time because the people engaged in syndicated estafa has already covered almost all parts of the country and that their victims are from different parts of the Philippines. Some are only intending to file their cases in the places where they have been victimized. So. pardon or unless he has already renounced his belief for his allegiance to a particular association or party or whatever. Instead they decided to become engaged in certain activities while employed as laborers or workers in different establishments such as those who were arrested are working in factories in Muntinlupa. what would happen? Under the theory of . how about the others who did not file but chose to file later on. the problem is there are others who file separate cases against them. they claimed that the arrest was illegal. it said that you continue to commit the crime that you have previously committed yourselves to commit until such time as you have renounced your belief in that particular struggle of yours. Actually rebellion is not what you call continuing crime. these people. When they were arrested without a warrant. You remember the case of Umil v. If we are going to have them consolidated. While it is a continuing crime in a sense that the moment you committed the same. Well. syndicated estafa etc. The moment you commit it. An example of which is violation of BP22. Just like in the case of rebellion.sentence. A transitory crime is a crime where any of its elements or any of its ingredients may have been committed in another place and that you can file the case in any of the places where any of its elements or any of its ingredients was committed. You have now several syndicated estafa cases. Some of them have never filed cases against this people. unless he has already been given amnesty. But it is a continuous crime. actually it is a continuous crime which is different from a transitory crime. you still continue to commit it up to the time that you have renounced your belief in such struggle. there is only one criminal intent there. But then as the SC has stated in that case. Look. you continue to commit the same even if you have not actually been in the active participation of the acts being committed by your friends in the movement. there is only a single criminal intent especially if that person by the use of a corporation collects contributions from the general public and actually their purpose is defraud the people from whom they collect money or whatever. some are working as laborers in certain construction sites in Las Pinas and other places in Metro Manila. And they have been identified by the army and the police as NPA regulars but then they decided not to engage anymore in arm struggle somewhere in a certain part of Luzon. illegal recruitment in a large scale. Umil and others are actually NPA regulars. The problem there is how to go about trying these cases because if it is a syndicated estafa. even in syndicated estafa. we have to study how are these particular continuing crimes or delito continuado may be resolved because it would greatly affect our citizens in the event that such kinds of crimes are committed. . There are cases in Makati of syndicated estafa. there is only one crime that was committed and that is syndicated estafa. one element may have taken place in one place. Example. a check was issued in Hongkong payable in Singapore. So. Let‘s say the Cebu court granted the petition for bail but the court in Makati denied. there is one that is one that is filed in Cebu. (CUT…NEXT SIDE OF THE TAPE) Yes. Because using the theory of delito continuado. Then it would result to forum shopping.delito continuado. Even if the others may have been committed in different places. Alright transitory crimes. you have to move to quash or to dismiss the other cases in order that the same will be consolidated only in one court. There could be two different rulings. others may have taken place in another place etc. I think the Secretary of Justice should take a hand on this to consolidate all these cases only in one court. They played golf at Wack-wack. So if you are the defense counsel for. That is the problem in delito continuado in relation to one criminal intent. sina ano? They are a problem eh. Kagaya nitong mga… sina Baladjay. can …. you have to file only one single criminal action in any of the places that the syndicated estafa was committed. had a good time. There are cases in Manila of syndicated estafa. The accused will naturally file a motion or a petition to bail in both courts so that she can enjoy temporary liberty while she is being tried. there is already one case decided by the Supreme Court. Pano ka ngayon? There are two. there are cases in Paranaque etc. Here you can file the case in any of those places where any of its essential elements or ingredients have been committed. say for example any of those kinds of accused. There is one filed in Makati. It would result to an accused being placed in double jeopardy or it is really a mess. These are what we call transitory crimes that well. That is where the check was delivered to the other party. There are even cases of simple estafa. then who decided only to participate later on? This is the problem. And that there will be no different resolutions from the other courts.syndicated estafa. kasi. But the parties went to the Philippines. How about the others who were not able to participate. there is only one criminal intent. If the check bounced. well BP22. naturally if the law says that the penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon a person who shall be found guilty of the crime of homicide. so let us say that in the crime of homicide. Now you have accomplice. So. If it is attempted. It is very easy how to do it and I will repeat so that you will remember the simple rules. the penalty is reclusion temporal. If he is an accomplice. So 1 and 1 is naturally 2. he committed the crime of homicide. and you have attempted. Alright! Supposing that the offender is a principal in an attempted homicide. Penalties for attempted felony. one degree lower. accomplices. Now you there a principal. Now. If he is an accessory. any questions? Now. No problem. Ok? Very simple because all that you have to do isif the crime is frustrated. if he is I said the principal and the crime he committed is in the attempted stage. Now. it is consummated. you have frustrated. Penalties for consummated felony. 2 degrees lower from reclusion temporal would be prision correccional. Now. That is what the law intends or the provision of the law should be interpreted. But supposing that the crime committed is a frustrated homicide. what penalty shall the principal be meted out? Or what is the penalty for the principal in a frustrated homicide? The penalty shall be one degree lower. the penalty that should be imposed upon him is 2 degrees lower from the penalty imposable on the principal in a consummated felony. 2 degrees lower. because it is 2 degrees lower from reclusion temporal. So one degree lower would be prision mayor. Now let us say that the offender is an accomplice. one degree lower. That is given. the penalty shall be 2 degrees lower from the penalty imposable by law. the principal naturally gets the full penalty. So the penalty will be one degree lower from the penalty imposable in the crime of homicide. In the computation of penalties. the penalty shall be 2 degrees lower which is prision correccional. if the accomplice in the crime of attempted homicide is to be . let‘s go to penalties. Ok? That is very simple. two degrees lower. In the case of homicide. I have adopted a little system and most of you who were my students in Crim 1 are familiar with this. Penalties for principals. Penalties for frustrated felony.Ok. One degree. The law speaks of homicide being consummated and that the person who will be sentenced to reclusion temporal is the principal. the principal committed the same so it is consummated. you have accessory. accessories. If he is an accomplice but the homicide is committed in its frustrated stage. That is prision mayor. naturally the penalty is prision correccional. the equivalent of the principal is naturally consummated. How much is the fee sir? Eh. kung mayaman sumingil ka na. Because minority is a privileged mitigating circumstance of which he is entitled to a reduction of one degree lower and there is no one degree lower for arresto menor.punished. the man would be worried. Ako ho ang nagtago ng balisong eh atty. if he is an accomplice to an attempted homicide. Or he may not even know that he is an accessory. You will be sentenced up to only 10 days of imprisonment. The illustration on the board is as follows: Homicide Principal . But because you are familiar with the participation of the offenders. And what is 3 degrees lower from the penalty of reclusion temporal? Arresto mayor. the penalty shall be 3 degrees lower. the penalty shall be 3 degrees lower. Masayang-masaya ngayon yun. how many degrees lower would be the penalty to the accessory? 2 degrees lower already because he is an accessory. Then all that you have to do is just tell him. Huli ako accessory. So. Are you hiring me? Alright. Ang galing ni atty talaga. years. you will just tell him don‘t worry I‘ll take care of your case. if you know this computation it will help you a lot in the event that a client would come and see you. From reclusion temporal it would be only prision correccional. Tinago ko nahuli ho ako. the penalty is arresto menor. Supposing that the accessory committed only frustrated homicide. Sigurado ka ba atty? Just plead guilty. probation ka pa. the penalty shall be arresto mayor. sign an agreement that I am your lawyer. ako na ang bahala sayo. Now supposing he is an accessory to an attempted felony. Hinuhuli ho ako ng pulis. If he is a minor. Ano ho ba ang kasalanan ko atty? Kung sakali ho at mapatunayan ako na may kasalanan. He may even be punished by only one day if he pleaded guilty because it is to be the minimum of arresto menor. hindi naman ho ako kasama dun sa patayan eh kaibigan ko ho yung pumunta sa bahay. So a person who might have committed an attempted homicide but he is only an accessory may be punished only by a penalty from 1-30 days of imprisonment. he might be thinking ay taon ito. Atty. In knowing this simple computation of penalties. patay libre. Ok? If the accessory committed a consummated felony let‘s say homicide. anong sentensya ho ang maibibigay sa akin? Naturally. the offender is physically or he has a physical . Do you have any questions? No questions? Alright. they cannot be considered as aggravating. I know that most of those who are here were my former students in Crim 1. Paiikutin kayo but eto lang yun eh. we are already in penalties. Even if they are present. some I do not know whether there are some who were not my former students. That is why we have to know what probably could possibly affect penalties. Well. naturally in cases of estafa. They are the modifying circumstances. they may not be considered as modifying circumstances. the ordinary. I don‘t know if in a week‘s time you will be able to know how to go about computing these penalties. This is the way how to compute. Can you? Within a week? Within 10 to 15 minutes by this simple explanation you know already what you are going to do even if they ask you in the bar exams. And you know that we have discussed already aggravating. this is simply the formula and you will never get lost. what is inherent in certain crimes? Well. of course. the specific. In the case of rape. in certain crimes such as rape there is always treachery most of the time. But although they are inherent mitigating circumstances. Papahirapan kayo ng iba. It‘s very simple but if you read the law.Consummated Reclusion Temporal Accomplice Frustrated Prision Mayor Accessory Attempted Prision Correccional So. mitigating circumstances. Well. there are in some cases that we have discovered inherent mitigating circumstances. the special. Aggravating you have the qualifying. So they are inherent in the commission of the crime. you will never get lost. That is how simple it is. Say for example. In any other penalty. the qualified. mitigating privileged and ordinary. You will note that there are certain crimes of which an aggravating circumstance is in by itself is inherent. there is always evident premeditation. Even in mitigating circumstances. this simple computation. inherent. bye bye baby. etc. the qualifying aggravating circumstances. the ordinary. And even if you were able to prove it. But would it be a modifying or mitigating circumstance in the crime of rape if he is the offender? Naturally it is not. You might probably get about 80. But is mere abuse of confidence enough in the crime of qualified theft? No. that would be a lot of use to you.defect. very important. So you see there are instances where the determination of modifying circumstances are very. Pag wala kang nakitang grave sa information sa qualified theft. under the rules of criminal procedures. But there was a time when they asked examinees to compute penalties and the percentage given is 15%. let your client be arraigned. Failure to allege that you cannot prove it. it is very rare as the rains in May when they are going to ask you to compute penalties. It is actually even a qualified aggravating circumstance.qualified theft always grave abuse of confidence. look ladies and gentlemen. and those which I have not discussed which are still a part of Book 1. because if you are very familiar with the aggravating circumstances. it will not be taken as a modifying circumstance to aggravate the penalty that may be imposed or even to qualify the crime to a more serious one. with respect to aggravating circumstances is that they must be alleged in the information. 75 but definitely the chances are you will be having a difficult time. do not call his attention. Your only chance of getting a passing grade is to know everything aside from the question regarding penalties. Then we will go to probation law and then we . although in my experience. I will discuss further. Going into penalties. There are so many ah remember that . the qualified circumstances. Wala. Even in the bar exams. Pabayaan mo. 15! So. we do not know eh what would be in the mind of the examiner. it is not. the inherent aggravating circumstances. But then. huwag mo ng turuan yung prosecutor. both may be committed by abused of confidence. if you do not penalties. so he can be only found guilty to a more lesser offense of theft. even prosecutors.penalties. because there is no allegation of grave abuse of confidence. So it becomes an inherent aggravating circumstance in qualified theft if it is grave abuse of confidence. A physical defect by itself is inherent mitigating. Can the judge convict him of qualified theft? No. Alright by Wednesday. you have to be familiar with all these. delikado pa. Do not call the attention of the prosecutor or even the judge. It even qualifies a mere crime of simple theft to that of qualified theft. There are usual mistakes that are being committed by lawyers.. But it will be aggravating if the person who is raped is suffering from physical defect. It has been my experience in the bench say for example in the crime of estafa or in qualified theft. So. That is why the rule now. even some judges. we will discuss the indeterminate sentence law and how to compute the penalties that should be imposed applying Indeterminate Sentence law. That is a memorandum circular of the SC regarding juveniles in conflict with the law. When however. Let us then meet on Wednesday. You will note that there are so many laws which imposed the fine despite the fact that the principal penalty of imprisonment is already afflictive in nature. The rule is if the penalty of imprisonment is already afflictive or more than 6 years. well. must have to serve a subsidiary imprisonment in the event he fails to pay the fine.will go to other special laws that have connections with Book 1 of the RPC. If I discuss penalties further. Those that I have missed. I am going to discuss so that you will be well-rounded after we finish book 1 of RPC. that is the rule. . it will take me more than 30 minutes so it‘s useless because I want to start from the very beginning in order that you may be able to understand fully what I am saying especially those that involve the application of the indeterminate sentence law. 2003 By: Charmane Kanahashi While MANE‘s eating a bag of CHEETOS… The FINES may be a part of the penalty either and or a fine which accompanied an imprisonment or that the fine is the sole penalty that was imposed by the court. and there is also a fine imposed in the same penalty to the accused. the penalty consisting of imprisonment is correctional in nature or that it is a light penalty. no subsidiary imprisonment if the fine is not paid by the accused. These memorandums actually are in the nature of laws but then. if every there is an accompanying fine. the SC will apply them whether you like it or not. the accused. ~~~end of tape~~~ DATE: JULY 23. Remember. that PD603 has already been amended and not only amended but actually overtaken already by even a new circular of the SC. the law is. so the subsidiary imprisonment even if computing the same to reach up to 1/3 only.000. that would be how many years huh? P1M? P8/day? Patay ka d‘on. how many days are there in a year? How many? 125. and the penalty is correctional in nature. correct in saying that well. the subsidiary imprisonment cannot exceed 6 months. the subsidiary imprisonment cannot exceed 6 months. I will repeat. if it is simply a fine. shall we call it. He cannot because that is the law. in connection with violation of BP 22. he will serve subsidiary imprisonment but the latter shall be 1/3 of the penalty imposed in the maximum which if you compute the same. Thus. the maximum subsidiary imprisonment that the accused should serve. So even if the fine is P1M. then they will say ah P1M at P8/day.000 days. he cannot suffer for any subsidiary imprisonment in the event that he refused or fails pay the fine. But then the law only says that if the sole penalty if a fine. well. you will compute probably the subsidiary imprisonment at P8/day. even to the judges after deciding 2 or 3 cases. If the penalty is already afflictive. (background: 342. the subsidiary imprisonment to be imposed upon the accused should only be up to 1 year and it cannot exceed the same even if it is less than 1/3 of the maximum of the penalty to be imposed. the subsidiary imprisonment for P6. HAHAHA! Do you expect him to live that long?! So. the subsidiary imprisonment shall not be more than 1/3 of the principal penalty of imprisonment but it cannot exceed 1 year.000 days and if you convert that into years. Alright. and it involves an imprisonment even if the offender failed to pay the fine or refused to pay the fine.In the case where the fine is not made or is not paid. according to the law. the same will still exceed 1 year.000 will be more than a year. or even arresto as the case may be. if the accused failed to pay the fine. when the SC issued a circular. wherein the SC categorically stated that if the offender in BP 22 is a first timer. OK! . how many days will P1M be at P8/day? It will be about more than maybe 10. if the principal penalty of fine is imposed. the penalty that should be imposed should only be fine equal to the value of the check that bounced.000 or even 40. Say for example the accused was sentenced to an imprisonment of up to 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional that is the maximum. it cannot exceed. and that it should be at P8/day if they do not know the rules regarding subsidiary imprisonment. cannot exceed 6 months. ha. 6 months lang ‗yon?! This is important because although the SC have toned down a little in cases of BP 22. People were expecting subsidiary imprisonment d‘yan if they cannot pay the fine.4 years). and a fine of P6. In connection with the principal penalty of fine. naturally you speak of. I think. On the other hand. executing the offender in the future. is actually only almost a repetition of the old law. The last portion of the article is not only confusing but is wrong! When you speak of suspension. ALRIGHT! Then. We have had occasions of seeing already old people who still commit certain crimes. it should be that the person who has reached the age of 70 cannot be executed. we discuss the death penalty before we go to the Indeterminate Sentence. it still cannot exceed 1/3 if the subsidiary imprisonment consists of 1/3. Not suspension huh? But. how much more execute him? So that provision of the law. she cannot be executed. Alright! . you cannot even impose the death penalty to a person who is 70 or over. ALRIGHT! How about suspension of the implementation of death sentence? According to the law. Because that is suspension eh! There will come a time when you will execute him but if he is an old man already. The reason being that a person who less than 18 years of age has not yet reached physical and mental maturity to make him suffer the supreme penalty of death. would rather be that. The law says that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon a person who at the time of the commission of the crime is less than 18 years old and to those who at the time of the promulgation of the sentence is already 70 years old or over. this people are already old. And the execution shall be suspended. you can wait for only about 5 years. Another one that was enumerated under the law is that when the offender has reached the age of 70 or more. amendments. shall we call it.‖ And because. It shall be at least 1/3. the 1/3 cannot still exceed 1 year. So. a woman who is pregnant and w/n a period of 1 year from date of her delivery. We consider them actually as people who deserve not condemnation but sometimes compassion. shall we call it. has been misunderstood. 10 years and that will be his ―the end. a person who is 70 or over is only a few steps from the grave. The death penalty law which is covered by RA 7659 amending the provisions of the RPC.There is actually no problem regarding subsidiary imprisonment as long as the penalty that was imposed are correctional or light penalties because there is a specific rule. cannot exceed 1/3 of the principal penalty of imprisonment but even if it does not exceed 1 year. There are only very few. you know. they can ask an extension to God. to forward the records of the case to the Office of the President w/n 20 days for review purposes in relation to the exercise of the power of the President to grant pardon or commutation of sentence or you know. the RTC or SB imposes the death penalty. Well. So. they are very strict. can it?? It‘s the law. And the . considered submitted for decision. There are how many death convicts who are waiting for the final decision of the SC? There are more than 1. the steno reporter should see to it that the transcript of steno notes be completed and submitted to the SC w/n 15 days. The SC will not be able to decide a case where the penalty imposed is death w/n a period of 1 year. But then when the lower courts are the ones who are supposed to resolve pending incidents. the period w/ w/c the SC shall render judgment must be a period w/n 1 year from the completion of the record of the case. the accused need not appeal because the law provides for an automatic appeal. The first is about the woman and the second is when the person becomes insane after the finality of the judgment huh? And if he became insane after the finality of judgment. According to the law on death penalty. the moment that a lower court. the SC will issue a resolution directing the parties to submit their respective memorandum. If the memorandum and all other papers are already complete. particularly. usually. those who passed the law did not realize that it will come to a point where the SC will be deluged of this kind of cases. Alright.. conditional pardon or whatever hmm. it cannot be accomplished.000 death convicts in the death row. those that are lacking in TSNs from the date of transmittal to the SC. under the law. 3 cases a day?! That would be an impossible task! It is the. And that if the records of the case is not complete. But if he did not regain his lucid interval eh he stays in the mental institution.There are only 2 instances where the execution of the death sentence can be suspended. But that is already an impossible task! At the present. the SC has to decide at least 3 cases everyday including Sundays and holidays. you have to wait until he regains his sanity or when he regains a lucid interval. Well. You all know that when the records of the case are already complete in the SC. all of them are submitted. the accused files a notice of appeal but even if he does not file any notice of appeal. it is the duty of the SC. So if. The SC cannot ask for an extension. That‘s the only thing that they can do probably. that is the 2nd level court. the records of the case shall be transmitted and forwarded to the Honorable SC w/n 20 days from the promulgation of judgment. That is impossible. the government is represented by the SolGen and the accused will be represented by his counsel on record. They should have passed a law that is more realistic. Okay. If the SC finally decides the case and it has attained finality. say for example. for record purposes. Office of the President has also 1 year to decide whether the President shall grant pardon or not so the accused will have to wait for 2 years. But that is, shall we call it, a long time. Alright! If the President does (sic) not decide to grant pardon or any of the clemencies that the President has in his powers, the Office of the President is required to return the records to the SC and that the SC upon receipt of the records has also, not only the authority but the obligation to remand the records of the case to the court of origin, the 2nd level trial court. Why is it that the records of the case has to be forwarded to the 2nd level courts, to the RTC or SB? Actually, the old law has provided for certain rules and regulations in connection with the execution of the death convict. Under the old system, it is the lower court who upon receipt of the records of the case that will fix the date of execution. Now, no more. I don‘t know what is happening but what I‘ve read from the rules and regulations of the Bureau of Corrections is that the Director of Prisons that schedule the execution of the convict. Although I believe that it is wrong because it should be the court which should schedule. It should actually determine the date of the execution of the convict. Now, the convict must be only informed of his execution before sunrise of the day of his execution and execution shall not take place until 8 hrs. thereafter giving way to the accused to, shall we call it, call his family, to call the minister of his faith or his priest or whatever, call his lawyer to assist him in the disposition of his properties, call his physician for him to know whether he is still healthy or not, he might be insane already or whatever and he actually has the privilege of even calling for his friends and family those whom he wants to confer. The conference shall take place in his chambers or in the place where he is confined. And he can actually make use of the 8 hrs. that is allotted to him. It used to be that the Bureau of Corrections has a practice then before the new law has been passed that prisoners to be executed may ask for their last meal and they have the choice of their last meal. The usually ask, during those times, Maxx‘s Fried Chicken, isang buo, Maxx‘s noong unang panahon pa ‗yang Maxx, Maxx na ‗yan! Wala naman noong KFC, Kenny Rogers, wala namang Inasal noon or whatever. So Max parati ‗yan and others will ask for a little caviar here and there etc. but now, the prisoners, the convicts who are supposed to die by lethal injection are not being given that privilege anymore. Their last meal shall consist of the same meal that other prisoners are taking. Sabi nga nung Bureau Director, ―bakit pa pakakainin ng masarap ‗yan eh papatayin din naman?‖ But it was then during the time of Pineda, Canal, or that one from Bacolod, they were even asked what food they want etc. even if they ordered the best in town, they will be given to them. Now, no more. ALRIGHT! During the execution of the convict, his relatives may be present his wife etc., those who may want to watch his execution but then the number of persons who shall witness the execution should be limited by the Director of Prisons. You know of course that the PRESS are the ones who are most interested in covering the execution of a death convict. Piyesta nga daw ‗dun ‗pagka may execution eh. Unlike in the US where it is actually not an event that would be carried all over the radios, TV, etc. Hindi eh. They do it as a matter of course. Dito, it is a sarswela. And that, well, the usual procedure in connection with the PRESS is that they cannot all be accommodated during the execution so what they are going to do is draw lots. ‗Pag nabunot mo ikaw ngayon, ikaw, ikalawa ikaw, alright, ‗yung mga iba, wait na lang kayo. You have to wait for your turn. OK.. There will be 2 physicians who will attend to the death convict and they shall also be the ones who should declare him dead. When a death convict has been declared dead, what? His body may be claimed by his relatives. By his family. If the family claims his body, then it shall be given to them with instructions from the Director that the body of the death convict cannot be buried with pomp. If no relative/s claim the body of the death convict, any medical or scientific institution or school may ask the Director of Prisons that the body of the death convict be given to them for scientific or medical studies and the body shall stay with them for not more than 1 year. And after such period, the scientific institution or school shall cause the burial of the death convict in one of the public cemeteries and the burial shall be that of a pauper‘s burial. In the event that nobody would want the body anymore, no relatives, no institution etc. is interested in the body of the death convict, then the Bureau Director shall see to it that the body of the convict which has been executed shall be buried in the public cemetery inside the Bureau of Corrections in a pauper‘s burial. So, that ends the, shall we call it, the procedure in connection with the execution of the death convict etc. and the disposition of his body. OK! Do you have any questions? No questions? Alright, let us proceed to the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The Indeterminate Sentence Law is actually, an application of the Positivist Theory. You will recall that the purpose of imposing a penalty under the Positivist Theory is to reform, to rehabilitate or to correct the errors of the ways of the offender. Yes.. (background question: In the case of lethal injection, what will happen if the dosage was inadequate to kill the person? Can the procedure be performed again? Yes. How many times? Until he dies!) There was a case, actually, there was an incident that happened in the Phils. When the method being used then in executing a death convict is through electrocution. 5,000 volts of electricity was set through the body of the death convict but he did not die! He did not, 5,000 volts ha. They increased the same to 7,500, hindi pa rin. They increased it already to 10,000, ‗ayun patay. So the same is true in lethal injection. But they will remember or recall the case of Echegaray, that his lawyer, Atty. Teodoro Te, on a question of law, filed a case for the SC in connection with the implementation of the mode of execution of Leo Echegaray. It is being argued by Atty. Te at that time, that when the crime was committed by accused Echegaray, the mode of putting a person to death at that time is through gas chambers. But during the interregnum, while his appeal is being reviewed by the SC, the Congress passed another law changing the mode of execution from gas chambers to lethal injection. According to Atty. Theodore Te, the accused should be executed by the mode of execution at the time of commission of the crime. So the SC, well, the only why a person is being executed after he has been sentenced to death is to put him to death. The manner with which a person may be put to death is not anymore a legal issue. It could be by any other means which the law has permitted. If it is lethal injection, even if that is not the means of putting to death the convict on the day of the commission of the crime, it shall still be through lethal injection that he has to die. There is no problem anymore in connection with the means and methods with which the accused may be put to death. OK! Any other question? (background: Judge, what does it mean when a person is sentenced with 3 death penalties?) Actually it is only a, shall we call it, a description of the penalties that the court has to impose but there can only be one execution because he only has 1 life. The court usually, for purposes of, shall we call it, informing the world that such person has committed 3 crimes of which the penalties are death. So they will impose 3 separate penalties of death but he can only be executed once. Some even have been sentenced to as many as 12 death penalties but the SC said that well, there is only one life that can be executed and if the same has been executed, that is the end. ALRIGHT! Yes.. (background: What if the imposable penalty is death penalty, can the government not impose it, for example the case of extradition of a foreigner to the US, the SC has condition for the extradition, there is a condition that death penalty will not be imposed?) Actually, that is an interference to the independence of the Phils. Why?! Why should they impose that condition? I know what you‘re talking about, sa Atong Ang? The court in the US has agreed to hear the petition for extradition and then set their conditions which the Phils. has to follow otherwise, they will not hear the extradition case. They look upon the Phils. as a subordinate, huh? Na dapat sumunod na lang tayo sa utos nila. I mean if they are encroaching upon the independence of our country, they should not impose such a condition. Maybe they can, shall we call it, on the side, just make ―bulong‖, ―sige I will help dito, I will help dito pero you tell your President, you tell your people there that he should not be sentenced to death.‖ Because Atong Ang has already informed the authorities of the US that if he is deported to the Phils. or if he is extradited to the Phils., he will be sentenced to death. He will not get even an inch of favor from the government. I think that is wrong; that is not supposed to be flaunted by the US that they can dictate upon us on what to do with a certain person who has been accused of a crime? Di pu-pwede ‗yon. Can we impose that also? If we want a person to be extradited to their country? Sabihin natin ―a di pwede, we will only extradite this person to your country if you will not sentence him to death.‖ Oh, are they not going to cry foul? Are they not going to howl etc? Sasabihin nila terrorist na tayo so that they can declare war against us. Any other question? ALRIGHT, let‘s take a break then I will continue with the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Sneeze! (Bless you, Judge!) The SC has come up with a decision lately that all penalties to be imposed by the Court when the maximum exceeds 1 year, except on one instance, shall have a minimum and a maximum. In other words, there is no more straight penalty when the maximum of the penalty has exceeded 1 year, except for one. It used to be a practice of the courts to impose straight penalties if they do not like the accused. Because, if a straight penalty is imposed, the accused must have to undergo imprisonment up to the last day of the penalty imposed upon him. But according to the SC, this violates the right of the accused to enjoy the privileges under the indeterminate sentence as the ISL encourages good behavior while a person is serving sentence. You will note that even under several provisions of the RPC, reduction of penalties are allowed when one escaped during or on occasion of calamities, well, for good behavior, they are being _____ allowances for good behavior up to 15 days a month if they have already exceeded serving sentence of more than 10 years. So this actually encourages good behavior to the accused. Now, the ISL does not apply to the following, does NOT apply ha! It does not apply to those who had been sentenced to indivisible penalties such as death, reclusion perpertua and life imprisonment. You cannot apply the ISL because there is no, shall we call it, periods that the same may be lowered to and that although there is a range of the penalty of reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment, such penalties still remain indivisible. There was one time when the SC considered reclusion perpetua as a divisible penalty and that was when they decided the case of People vs. Lucas. The SC then committed an error when the SC declared that reclusion perpetua having a range of from, 20 years and 1 day to 30 years then, is a divisible penalty. But when the OSG asked for a clarification, the SC, in a one-page resolution, said that reclusion perpetua is NOT a divisible penalty and it shall remain as These penalties are destierro and suspension.If you are going to the explanation of the SC in some cases. That is what the SC has ruled in several cases. as you will find out hmm. to piracy etc. On the other hand. determine the penalty to be imposed upon the accused without and then apply the ISL and after applying the ISL..such. hmm. What is the meaning of the same? Well. Also. shall we call it. the ISL if applied to special laws or those which the benefits of the ISL do not apply. except those which are enumerated ha. mutiny and even hijacking. for felonies. Although the sentence is still indeterminate. Now. ALRIGHT! Let us say for example that a person is charged of a crime which is punishable under the RPC and that let us supposed that the penalty provided for by the law is prision mayor. you will note that the SC says that you should first. piracy. It should always be a straight penalty or a penalty of which the time is fixed. the minimum shall be the minimum fixed by the law and the maximum cannot exceed the maximum fixed by the law. Now. the accused shall enjoy a certain benefit if the crime he committed falls under the category of a felony or even if it does not fall under the category of a felony if it is a special law but it uses the penalties common to felonies under the RPC. Also. the indeterminate sentence do not apply to penalties the maximum of which do not exceed 1 year. the ISL do not apply to crimes of treason and others which are included in crimes against national security. under the law such as treason etc. But. Aside from that. would simply mean that the minimum shall be 1 degree lower and the maximum cannot exceed the maximum fixed by law after considering the modifying circumstances. it does not apply to crimes against humanity or against the law of nations such as piracy. ALRIGHT! There is a difference when the law says that the BENEFITS of the ISL shall not apply because the benefits of the ISL for felonies ha. These are the instances where the ISL does not apply. the benefits of the ISL for crimes considered as felonies or for those offenses which uses the penalty common only to the penalties provided under the RPC. ha and also to those who are habitual delinquents. the provisions of the ISL shall not also apply to penalties which does not involve imprisonment. Alright. penalty and which would be more easier for the courts and the students . the most practical and easiest way of determining the penalty which will arrive in the same. you determine the modifying circumstances. the benefits of the ISL do not apply to crimes of treason etc. I don‘t know whether it‘s included in your book but definitely you cannot apply the ISL the penalties which does not involve imprisonment. Well. is prision correccional in its minimum period. it depends upon the time when the judge prepared the computation. Now. the minimum penalty that shall be imposed upon him should be 1 degree lower from prision mayor maximum because you had already considered the modifying circumstance. shall we call it. ―Uy. naturally prision mayor has 3 periods: minimum. dadala-dala pa ng bodyguard . apply the ISL by getting the minimum of the penalty by. That would be his start of the day. then he is entitled to the benefits of the ISL. Maybe about 6:30. The reason being that although. I go to the office early in the morning. I‘m there already. but kasi some of them cannot help sometimes but to open their mouths eh. as I said. hanggang 20 years pala ‗to. is for the court to determine first what are the modifying circumstances present. it wouldn‘t start and well. medium and maximum. get the range of prision correccional in its maximum period and prision mayor in its maximum period. if such be the case and the accused is not a habitual delinquent. and after applying the modifying circumstances. So it is easy. that would be etched in the mind of the judge. I will say it is still the discretion when there are no outside factors which will affect the decision of the judge in the computation of the sentence. Well. the accused did not even greet him ―good morning. he has to go to the repair shop to ask his auto mechanic to remedy the situation.‖ The accused has been there early but he has 2 -3 bodyguards with him as if he is going to a place where he is going to fight other people. well. Let us say there is an aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstance. this is where the discretion of the judge will come in. So. very early in the morning. Eh kung maimpormahan ‗yong. then.of law to understand is. it is not sometimes the discretion eh. Mainit ang ulo niya. Actually. My usual practice whenever I decide a case is to leave out the computation of the penalty for the morning prior to the promulgation. 2 months and 1 day to 6 years while prision mayor in its maximum period is an imprisonment of from 10 years and 1 day to 12 years. you just get the range of prision correccional in its minimum period. Now. supposing the judge is having a bad day that day. Di ba? Titingnan ‗yung kaso. the minimum thereof. The judge probably woke up on the wrong side of the bed and maybe when he was trying to start his car. you cannot expect him to be present the next day during promulgation! Yes! So what I usually do is. By 8:30. the penalty is prision mayor. I prepare the computation and of course after finishing the computation if the stenographer who knows how to type or how to encode the decision in the computer. ―Eh. And. and I think the SC will change his mind later. the whole decision is already complete and that what I have to do is just sign it. Hence. I can trust some of my employees. then she will be the one to finish it. if the accused suddenly gets _____ of the fact that the maximum of the penalty that will be imposed upon himself is 20 years. going down 1 degree within the period as provided for under the law. When he arrives in court. Say for example. The range of prision correccional in its maximum period is an imprisonment of from 4 years. Eh. apply the modifying circumstances present. Oh. we always think of the better way how to deal with these people. pero dumating si judge. The whole family are there.‖ Mainit ang ulo. it will be the maximum period. have strong family ties. maybe you know. So the judge will consider that. .) add 1 day to the maximum in the result in #3. ―eto naman pala mabuti mag pamilia. ―Siguro napilitan lang ito. maagang-maaga. ‗Yun lang. computing the penalty. You see the wife. ALRIGHT. looking very sad. They knew. you saw his children. two months. It‘s still within the range of the penalty. but then. very respectful of elders.) add the 1st 1/3 to 6 years and 1 day.) convert 4 years into days = 1460 2. it is. maybe. Which is what is needed. So what would be written by the judge there. di lang siya binati no‘n. He will sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence of from 6 years of prision correccional as minimum to 12 years of prision mayor as maximum. shall we call it. ―the accused is here by sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of from four years. they are there. freshly pressed even if his shoes is almost a rundown one. and one day of prision correccional…‖ ~~~end of tape~~~ MAJAH‘S NOTES: Computing the minimum. the judge will naturally take that into consideration.‗to. Di man lang bumati. these people. ―Salbahe ‗yan ah. it will be the medium 5. they knew that the accused will be sentenced.) divide into 3 3. his decision is correct.‖ Well. Medyo ayaw lang umistart ‗yung kanyang kotse. it is still clean. medium and maximum in ISL Example: Penalty is prision mayor in minimum and medium (6 years and 1 day to 10 years)= 10 years difference 1. ano ba ‗to?‖ ALRIGHT! So let us say for example that the judge will now compute the penalty.‖ ―kasama pa mga anak. it will be the minimum 4. they are very. In other words. but it is still neat.‖ etc.) add 1 day to the maximum in the medium period until 10 years. Nakita niya ‗yung akusado maayos ang bihis even if his clothes has seen better days etc. Is his decision correct? Yes. Although the court sometimes issues a writ of execution. The claim of the offended party may be lodged against the estate of the offender as long as the offender dies prior to the entry of final judgment of conviction and of course. on the civil aspect of the case. when the offender dies after the entry of final judgment. 2003 (Azenith Viojan) THREE-FOLD RULE --xxx--- DATE: August 4. the criminal liability of the offender is not extinguished. legatees and devisees etc and that would be the end of the settlement of the estate of the deceased person. that writ of execution cannot be implemented as against the estate but that writ of execution may still be of some use to the offended party. It is . It is one of the preferred credits or it is one of the liabilities which must be paid by the estate in the event that the administrator or the executor has already gathered and determined all the properties of the deceased including the debts. the offended party has still a recourse in order to recover the civil liability that the offender may have incurred by reason of having committed a crime.DATE: July 30. The death however of the offender also extinguishes his pecuniary liabilities or personal liabilities. expenses in relation to the administration of the properties including of course some of the preferred expenses such as burial and funeral expenses and sometimes an order from the court to pay attorney‘s fees which may be a part of the expenses. Now. Of which the administrator upon authority of the court may be allowed to defend the interest of the estate as against the claimant. the rule is different. But then. How? When delivery to the administrator as a claim against the estate but the same shall not be enforced. What happens? Can it be tried in the intestate proceedings? File a separate action against the estate. Only after all these liabilities that the estate may be distributed among the heirs. But in respect to these contingent claims wherein there is no judgment yet as to the civil liability of the offender. 2003 By: MajArvin EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY Criminal Liability may be extinguished by the death of the offender but when it is the offended party who dies. marriage by the offended party with the offender and well. say for example. And there are others. When there is a contingent claim. not against the estate eh. And it is against that bond that that contingent claim may be enforced. forgiveness by the wife on the offending husband in cases of marital rape. If ever there will be a final judgment against the estate. But this is the time when the heirs will be asked to post a bond bec there are contingent claims here amounting to maybe 10 million. And all of this will be paid before the residue will be distributed to the heirs. say for example. not anymore against the estate. that when there is a contingent claim what would be the natural reaction of the administrator or the executor. The accused will still be tried and accorded a sentence and he must be able to serve the sentence which the court has imposed upon . Then if the heirs are given already their respective shares. they will be asked to post a bond to answer to any or all contingent claims that may be adjudged against the estate by virtue of a final judgment. pardon. totally extinguishes the civil liability but the criminal aspect is not actually a concern in connection with the pardon to be given by the private offended party or by the heirs in the event that there is already a pending criminal action. pardon by the offended party given to the offender in private crimes prior to the institution of the criminal action. when there is a complete and absolute repeal of the law wherein in the accused may have been charged that totally extinguishes. Bec the administrator or executor cannot forever hold on to the properties of the heirs as it may dissipate and later on his bond will answer for those losses that may be incurred by the properties. this will become contingent claims. Well. And of course. So. The claim must be made within 2 years from when? From the final settlement of the estate? YES. the pardon by the offended party on the offender extinguishes. If there are already final judgment. But that repeal shall be subject to the condition that that repeal favors the accused. the estate are distributed. Did you get me? (4B:YES) Kung walang claim there is no problem eh. from the final settlement of the estate of the deceased person. the heirs must be ordered to post a bond when the property is already distributed to them. there are others.only when there is a finality that the interest of the claimant may become a reality. You cannot claim that damages in the intestate or estate proceedings of the deceased. you sue the estate di ba in a separate action. amnesty. But if there is a contingent claim still it is the duty of the executor or administrator to see to it that the all these properties are all ready after the payment of all the liabilities etc. naturally the easiest way of being able to recover your claim is against the bond. If the repeal will not favor the accused. you lay a claim against the estate. Although theoretically. Actually. There could be other grounds. it is useless. in relation to civil liabilities. Even if it has been lawfully acquired by the third person without prejudice on the part of that 3rd person to claim whatever damages he may have sustained by reason of having bought or received such property from another as against the one who gave it to him or sold it to him. Reparation is the payment of the actual value of the property at the time it was lost. this is only subject to the usual wear and tear of any property of that kind bec the wear and tear of a property would depend on what kind of a property it is and for what it is being used. naturally the wear and tear would be different from a passenger jeepney that is not being used for passenger purposes.him. Just remember—who gave that to you? How it was given? When? For what reason? Etc. the occasion with which that property was given. subject to an increase in its value by reason of the sentimental value that the owner attaches to it. ask them now before I proceed to prescription of crimes and prescription of penalties. of course. CIVIL LIABILITY RESTITUTION We can go also to how civil liability is satisfied. and then of course. If that property is being used. of course. destroyed or taken if it is already in the hands of a third person. Which may be. the importance that you attaches to that property are supposed to . Of course. But that property must be returned to the actual owner. the efforts that he has exerted in order to preserve the same and of course. Those are the things that you have to consider in sentimental values. as a passenger jeepney. REPARATION And you have reparation which includes. What were the things that you have to perform in order that it may be preserved etc. There is nothing much about extinction of criminal liability and if you want to ask some questions. civil liability may be satisfied only by restitution of the thing that has been lost. I mean. You want the way on how civil liability will be satisfied to be discussed first? Well. the importance which he attaches to the property and his life or in the life of the family. Others do not know how to prove the sentimental value. it is different from a passenger jeepney. say for example. when the jeepney is not a passenger jeepney. A sentimental value may be proven by establishing the reason for that property being in possession of the owner. the sentimental value that a person attaches to a thing. they . You were able to prove. who is the lawyer that you hired to assist you in this case? ―He is the one. is that correct? ―Yes. Witness. per appearance. Remember that when you allege sentimental value you must present evidence in relation to the sentimental value that you attaches to it. I don‘t know if you have come across that decision of the SC. murder even in rape cases. Accdg to the SC. sir. sabihin mo na. sir. sir‖. you have to prove your entitlement to attorney ‘s fees before the court should award. with this hiring of a lawyer.‖ Then. Failure on the part of the offended party to present evidence in connection with the sentimental value that one attaches to the property. no sentimental value in any amount can be adjudged in favor of the owner even if there would be an adjudged reparation of damages. etc. There is no need of proving what were the feelings suffered by the offended party in order to prove moral damages. no problem. you have prepared memorandum. if you are the one who is proving it.‖ Was that agreement reduced into writing? ―Yes. do you have an agreement? ―Yes. Previously. Aside from this. agreements. if you are the private prosecutor. All right. sir. in connection. What was not changed however is about attorney‘s fees which however should have been changed a long time ago. Well. All that you have to do is to ask the witness— Mr. you have to prove attorney‘s fees by competent evidence. anyway. He announced. what we have to prove is merely the fact of the commission of the crime of frustrated murder and the court may already adjudge moral damages as against the offender.be established. it will not take you 5 mins. about moral damages but now in a recent decision of the SC. Because the others. before the new case of 2003 was released. you have to prove even in cases of frustrated homicide. everything. What they want now is the billing. you said that you secured the services of a counsel. what are your agreements? Okay. mark it. before the SC—are you are still going to prove that you are entitled to attorney‘s fees? But then the SC has not yet changed its mind. The only problem there is in regard to moral damages. this is it. Dati-dati you have to prove. All right. per disappearance (heheheJ) tapos na. Look.‖ Will you please announce his name. INDEMNIFICATION FOR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES Consequential damages. you have signed so many pleadings before the lower court. about contracts. prescription of crimes and prescription of penalties. It is very easy. you cannot award exemplary damages. reclusion perpetua and death shall prescribe in 20 years. You just try to compare one from the other and remember the numbers. from there you can already make your own computation of the moral damages that you are going to award in favor of that person. 20. Judge issue mo naman na yung warrant. The court may take judicial notice that indeed that person suffered moral damages. do not assume. Otherwise. to determine how much bec the person then will announce what is his profession or what is his occupation. Whether he is a family man. I will look stupid…according to Jaworski when he said. 2. 15. But when you don‘t award moral damages. do you have to prove moral damages? Not anymore. correctional crimes punishable by correctional penalties. who is he in his community. etc. in prescription of penalties. 1. 1. PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES / PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES Okay. ―we will all look stupid . prescribes in 10 years. whether there is a probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest. if somebody asks me what was your basis. 5. the penalties of reclusion temporal. Then you have oral defamation—6 months and you have light felonies—2 months. So. The penalty of reclusion temporal and prision mayor prescribes in 15 years. etc. How can you award exemplary damages when there is no moral damages. only prision mayor prescribes in 15 years. only reclusion perpetua and death prescribes in 20 years. I remember libel. I should be satisfied then I should know all the facts that are contained in the records of the case. 20. We promise that we will be able to secure a warrant of… I have to study whether there is a valid information. based in the evidence presented. then I will not be able to answer them. itong prescription of penalties. except for arresto mayor. prescription of penalties. Villaraza & Villaraza charged Olivares of 19 counts of libel. There are 3. 10. So. Arresto mayor prescribes in 5 years. And it is up to the court. Then you have 1 year—libel. the SC said that it can be taken judicial notice of that when a person is stabbed and he nearly died. Now. 6. Pagdating nitong umaga. It was raffled last Friday when I did not go to the office. you can expect that exemplary damages may be awarded. Maybe even exemplary damages may not even be the subject of proof bec if moral damages is awarded. now we are having a problem bec of the case of the firm v. That is the only afflictive penalty that prescribes in 15 years. On the other hand. Oh. Ninas Cacho Olivares. 5. naturally. Napunta sa akin tatlo. 15. Why? In prescription of crimes. if you know the sequence. But then when it comes to the victims. ah prescription of crimes—yung una tatlo yun. prescription of crimes. The same is true with prescription of crimes.just assume that is what the SC do not want. 10. kinukulit na ko ng mga former Ateneans. yung una dalawa lang. we will all look stupid. And then read the answers that were given in the U. Prescriptions. No…so. If your examiner in the bar examination is prone to giving questions regarding definitions and enumerations. previous questions last year ha. When are prescription of crimes suspended? Well. Look at the. is fond of enumeration or give the meaning of. By whom? By the offended party or by any person or by the authorities. I‘ll just drop by but I‘m not the reviewee. So. now is the examiner. It shall be suspended until such time as the case has been filed etc. Your question will still be your question but the way how it is framed. He will of course allow you to prepare your own questions but he will revise it. So you tell your examinees. Or if he went to a country of which we have extradition treaty. I can assure you that would be an added bonus to the examinees if they will be able to familiarize themselves with the style of Justice Vitug bec he is the one actually handling all the preparation of the questions. In that way. there are some debates regarding that. Actually. the prescription of the crime will not continue. Just remember. He will just be arranging his disarranged hair. They are saying . it will not. Well. will the prescription of the crime be suspended? No. Law Center.P. suspended pa rin yun. Hindi rin. I won‘t have the luxury of time to give instructions but you will be able to help them in that way. Justice Vitug. Let all the bar examinees look at the bar questions last year and see how the questions were framed bec he was the one who framed them. if you are helping in the bar operations. let us say before suspension when shall prescription of the crimes commence? It shall commence upon the discovery of the crime. And Joker doesn‘t even say anything. you will know.here in this hearing. all that the person has to do is go to a country which the Philippines does not have extradition treaty so that the prescription of the crime will be suspended –NO. And it shall be interrupted when? It shall be interrupted when the person has been brought for preliminary investigations etc and is arrested. if you can remember the numbers. Jaworski kasi can get away with it eh. that is how easy it is. these are the usual enumerations that they give. So. it is very easy. Parati sinasabi niya. you will know his style. Most probably I will just be lecturing on updates in crim law for 2-4 hours as the case maybe. How about if he goes to a country which we do not have any extradition treaty? The more that it will not be suspended.‖ That is the language of Jaworski whenever he butt in any investigation (heheheJ) napapansin ko yun. he will be the one to frame it. Your friends that you are going to help will know the style. it will continue if again he will be able to evade the service of his sentence. is that correct? Lets say for example. the suspension for the running of the period for the prescription of penalties has been earned by the offender. suspended na naman. the moment you escape from prison. But if you commit a crime. I am sure that you are going to tell me that the principal penalty is the imprisonment. Once. To those who are in prison. the penalty for which you are supposed to serve will prescribe in one year.that it will be suspended etc bec he went to a country and well. Now. when should the prescription of penalties commence? Ah very easy. So. it shall commence only from the time that the offender while not under detention. As a matter of fact. The moment that you‘re caught. Kasi we can always get him and serve his sentence. ganun yun eh. patong ng patong yan. you commit another crime. the penalty is a correccional one—6 . The only thing that will actually totally extinguish whatever criminal liability or whatever penalty may be extinguished is when you are out and not serving your sentence. Bec if you are serving your sentence. will the prescription of the penalty be suspended?—Hindi. The crime for which you have been convicted. be sure that the crime you committed must be an offense so that you will not become a quasi-recidivist. the penalty shall only prescribe when you are able to escape from the institution where you are serving you sentence. Okay. no way. But then. you hide. Eh di magtago ka lang…magtago ka ng magtago. So. that is you problem again. You escape. can it be remitted? Meaning to say. however. once he has earned it. it will take you one year if you became liable for evasion of sentence before that particular crime of your prescribe. it will continue. Kasi if it is a penalty of imprisonment or a fine. quasi-recidivist ka. An imprisonment and a fine. the judgment of the court became final and executory. even if you are serving your sentence in your home. suspended na naman. It will not be suspended. ayun…ayos na. how about the evasion of service of sentence? Ah. It‘s only when you are outside and you don‘t commit a crime etc. It is different when it is prescription of penalty. How about prescription of penalties in regard to penalties that involves a compound one. If he goes to a country that we have extradition treaty. But how about the evasion of service of sentence? Kulong ka pa rin. Then. The moment it became final and executory and he has not been arrested not brought before judicial authorities for proper disposition then the prescription of penalties will already commence. If you commit a felony. will the same be considered as ineffective in the moment that he has been arrested? No. he should be given the benefit of having the prescription of crime suspended. if you are asked probably in the bar exams. which will be the basis of prescription. (heheheJ) But if you are asked your opinion and the reason why you are disagreeing…it is because all fines. tapos sasabihin mo what would be the basis is the fine. 000 but still I would like to disagree with that bec of the subsidiary imprisonment that attaches to a fine. Now. It cannot go beyond 6 months. From which of the 2 are you going to base the prescription of the penalty. and the other is an afflictive penalty bec it is more than P6. Bec the law specifically provides that the fine should be afflictive if it is more that P6. etc. What is the rule given by Reyes? And will you agree? Even if say for example.000 as a fine. When the subsidiary imprisonment for the fine is simply a correccional penalty. TAVERNKEEPERS. IN this . The word is ―OR‖ but it is P30. SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS. the principal himself…the one who committed the theft or the robbery. when the penalty is simply a fine…wala tayong problema. I will not agree even if they have a decision pa in that particular question. that would expire in 10 years. he was caught. No more no less. when there is a compound penalty…you look. that is prision correccional. But the problem is kung walang pambayad. We should go now to subsidiary liability of innkeepers. But then. 6 months is a correccional penalty.years—so. One is a correctional penalty. what would be the subsidiary imprisonment to be served by the accused? 6 months! What is 6 months? Correccional. why did I say that? Because if it is purely a fine.000. Oh. the imprisonment of the fine? According to Reyes. the owner. shall be fixed at 6 months. still he has to serve subsidiary imprisonment only for 6 months. You cannot increase it. the operator etc violated rules and regulations etc of the city or municipality or the ordinance of the municipality or the rules and regulations promulgated by the police etc…liable yan. We have a P50M fine in RA 9165 ha. Why? If you are going to ask me. in prescription of penalties. There are rules that must have to be followed. how long will he stay in jail?—6months even if it is P1M even if it is P30M—6 months pa rin. Kasi hindi mo mapalampas ng 6 months yan eh…it‘s a good issue to be resolved bec if he cannot pay the fine. it is ―AND‖ a fine. just follow what is in the book. there is a tail in the penalty…the tail is the fine. Ayun na. There is a rule that if. say for example. Well. AND PROPRIETORS OF ESTABLISHMENTS Okay. which will you consider as the principal penalty—is it the imprisonment or the fine? For purposes of prescription. the fine. irrespective of the amounts if the same would exceed a subsidiary imprisonment of 6 months. There is no problem regarding that bec if say for example. My contention however despite that opinion is that the principal penalty shall be the imprisonment in a compound penalty. there is no problem. tavernkeepers. the teachers cannot discipline them. . When the crime committed is robbery with force. So. it is only when the parents cannot pay that their properties may be held liable. even if they have their own properties. Those who did a research of RA 7610 or those who sponsored it. secondary. you can go after them and make them liable. that is when they are not liable. You will become parents. Pag medyo college na. Yun ang masakit eh. Have you seen these resorts if they have any notice? WALA. teachers? Who are primarily liable for the damages resulting out of a crime incurred by their ward or by their children? Parents muna. they are liable. The property of the parents are the 1st that are supposed to answer for the liability incurred by their children and the teachers incurred by their pupils or by their students. Even in theft cases.connection. whatever. Itong children. Its when they do not have any property or the property has been exhausted that they will go after the property of the pupil or the ward. yet the primary liability is on the teacher. violence or intimidation upon persons…ayan. would this affect the rule that you have to declare your valuables in the establishment and that you abide the rules and regulations before you can recover from them subsidiarily if there is a violation of an ordinance by the owner of the establishment? Remember that the 2 are separate from each other. 1st level and 2nd level education lang ito. Kagaya ng pumunta ka…alam ko madalas kayo. Your children are the one committing it bec you cannot discipline them anymore. These are very simple. It is only when there is a notice that you should inform them etc and they have not violated any rules and regulations that they are not subsidiarily liable. may I ask you. It is only when they did not violate any rules and regulations or ordinance and you did not declare…ah. IF they have no notice. SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF OTHER PERSONS How about parents. There is even a guard but there is no notice there. you did not declare. liable sila. maybe you will become teachers someday. you go to resorts etc wherein it is a resort and at the same time a restaurant…you attend a reception of weddings or baptismal parties. even if you did not declare but they violated certain rules and regulations or ordinance. we do not know. Hindi eh. hindi na kasali yan. you belong to the Human Rights group or the rights of children…did you ever look at this provision of the law. Oh. Ano mangyayari diyan? Only sa minors lang yan ha—pupils. can you go after them? YES. the teacher cannot even hit them with a small stick. nawalan ka. they are not liable EXCEPT when the ones who perpetrated it are their own employees. but then you lost it bec they do not have a double lock and there is an ordinance that their doors must have a double lock. Anong gusto mo. Let us just clear that up. or the simple one? Madali lang naman ang Indeterminate Sentence eh. extinction of civil liability…ah. Joanne: Computation of Indeterminate Sentence? Computation? Napakadali lang naman nun eh. And that benefit is that the minimum penalty shall be lowered by one degree from the penalty—imposed or imposable? (judge: hahaha J) If you say imposed. [Facts: Homicide – Reclusion Temporal Offender: 17 years old Plea: guilty Under the ISL. 2170 or 2176 of the Civil Code? Yan na yun—lost of the thing due. If the offender is a 17 year old boy. then you have of course. Do you have any questions? In Book One…? We have already discussed ISL. that is a different matter when you say imposable.EXTINCTION OF CIVIL LIABILITY Well. Probation? Wala ah…(heheheJ)…tignan natin. etc. payment. others such as novation—these would extinguish the civil liability or it would be considered as already closed. What are you going to do in order to arrive at the penalty which is imposable under the law? Are you now going to lower the penalty by one degree immediately bec the offender is entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance of minority? After lowering it to 1 degree. yung more complicated. he pleaded guilty. are you going to fix the penalty to be imposed upon the accused to the minimum because there is present one mitigating circumstance…so that the penalty . wala namang problema yan eh. Just read Art. Its only when the crime is a felony or when an offense carries with it a penalty common to violations of the RPC that he shall enjoy the benefits of the ISL. one degree lower for the minimum Maximum should not exceed the maximum fixed by law ] This is a simple example of the computation of the benefits of the ISL that an accused may enjoy bec it is a crime punishable under the RPC known as a felony. He committed homicide. Judge wrote this on the board. The process will be long and tedious and sometimes it will result toy confusion. then 1 degree lower would be prision mayor then tsaka ka pa lang mag-aaply etc…magulo yun eh. uumpisahan mo kaagad – homicide. after applying the modified circumstance of guilty. What does the ISL says? The minimum shall be one degree lower from the penalty to be imposed by the law. So. Hindi na yung maghahanap ka ng kung anu-ano pa. To be IMPOSED. So. So. prision mayor in its minimum period which is 6 years and 1 day to 8 years and prision correccional in its minimum would be 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months. go to the application of the modifying circumstances. Do it the easier way. bec it is still within the range. its as a simple as that and . (heheheJ) Eto na yung pinakamadali eh. I have been telling you that it depends upon the temper of the judge when he arrives at the office as to the computation of the penalty. Kaya nga maginoong bastos eh. there is no error. the penalty that will be imposed is PRISION MAYOR—MINIMUM. one degree lower from the penalty to be imposed by the law is PRISION CORRECCIONAL – MINIMUM. the judge can impose an IS of from 6 months and 1 day of prision correccional as minimum to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as maximum. Then. [Illustration: MINIMUM= Prision Correccional in its minimum (6 months & 1 day to 2 years & 4 months) MAXIMUM= Prision Mayor in its minimum (6 years & 1 day to 8 years) ] Now. lower the penalty by one degree. Then.‖ Well. Supposing the judge said ―maginoong bastos naman ito eh. Will the judge be right? Yes. Hahaba ang proceso. I will sentence you of an Indeterminate Penalty of from 6 months and 1 day of prision correctional as minimum to 8 years of prision mayor as maximum. Here. Maginoo dun sa minimum. The easier way is that considering that homicide is punishable by reclusion temporal and the offender is only 17. dalawang taon agad ang layo… to 8 years of prision mayor as maximum. The accused is hereby sentenced an Indeterminate Penalty of from 2 years and 4 months of prision correccional…tignan nyo. you apply the ISL. bastos na pagdating dun sa maximum. You know the range already. Is he correct? Yes. penalty: reclusion temporal. If you did the 2nd that will be very confusing. Then there will be an error in the computation. The penalty will be announced by judge in open court or it will be read.that should be imposed upon the accused is prision mayor in its minimum period? OR should you first apply the ISL by lowering the minimum to one degree lower then you apply already the privileged mitigating circumstance and then the modifying circumstance of plea of guilty. Dun tayo sa safe side. that would be the result of some of the decisions of the SC if you are going to be very literal about it. (4B: Yehey! J). You are on the safe side. I declare Wednesday as a free cut day. You will never be wrong.you will always be right. That is why I have adopted this system so that you will always be right. Taking the bar exams is not a gamble. Pag sinabi nyong pagdating na lang ng pre-bar tsaka na ko mag-aaral. then we will end the session. wag ka nang mag-aral… (heheheJ)… di ka rin lang papasa. E di maguumpisa ng an indeterminate sentence of 6 years of prision correccional as minimum to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as maximum…isang araw lang ang diperensya! Ano niloloko mo ang sarili mo? (heheheJ) So. it is actually by a good preparation that you are going to be successful in the taking of the bar examination. if you do not have anything more. mahirap yung makikipagsugal ka pa. Kaya ngayon pa lang talagang pukpukin na ninyo…magpuyat na kayo. . Anything else. Even if sometimes the decision of the SC says that the minimum shall be within the range of prision correccional in any period…napakalaki ng range nun eh. Well. Documents Similar To Criminal Law I Notes By Judge Oscar Pimentel.docxSkip carouselcarousel previouscarousel nextRemedial Law Transcription- BrondialCommercial Law Review (Abella)Petition for Appointment as Notary PublicBrondial Notes- Criminal procedureSPL - Judge Pimentel NotesSandoval Poli Rev Lecture NotesJudge Pimentel Crim Transcript - Book 1Atty Lorenzo Labor LawREM 1 Brondial NotesAtty. Brondial REM2 Case Doctrines 2012 by; TUGSMarcos v Heirs of Navarro[BSL] CASE DOCTRINES IN CIVIL PROCEDURE (BRONDIAL)UST Golden Notes - Intellectual Property LawSample Replyrem civ pro (2)326723282-Commercial-Law-Reviewer-Sundiang-and-Aquino-pdf.pdfCyberCrime Case DigestNegotiable Law Doctrines (Sundiang)Thomas Nephew, 6/19/17Criminal Law Transcript for Judge Pimentel Part 2Obligations and Contracts Dean Del Castillo NotesCriminal Law Ortega NotesMagtajas vs. PryceCompilation of Cases- Insurance LawLaw on Nego - Sundiang NotesCivil Law Review Digests AssocRemoval ExamInsurance Law Case DigestsInsurance Digest CasesCOA Consolidated Case DigestMore From Marife Tubilag ManejaSkip carouselcarousel previouscarousel nextproperty 455 and 453.docxBUILDING or PLANTING_propertyMarriageComm Sundiang Aquino10_Rule on Environmental Cases 2015-11-27@WPC vs. JMC7_Bar Exam Questions on Special WritsCoverletterRight of AccessionBrondial Notes10_Rule on Environmental cases 2015-11-27.docx1_Habeas Corpus Lecture 2015-11-27Order of Intestate SuccessionConsolidated Cases for Contracts_2.0WillsLegal and Judicial FormsRem2 Razon vs Tagitis DigestBrondial Notes - Rule 39_provisional Remedies_special Civil ActionsContracts Case DigestsOutline in Persons & Family Relations July 2006(Black)SababanMagicNotes-TaxationLaw1Table of ContentsPALS Civil Procedure-libreCiv2 2013 DigestsSPECPRO Case DoctrinesAdvance Legal WritingRem 2_latest CasesReport on Legal Medicine PowerpointBayot v. CAMARK Rem2 Razon vs Tagitis DigestFooter MenuBack To TopAboutAbout ScribdPressOur blogJoin our team!Contact UsJoin todayInvite FriendsGiftsLegalTermsPrivacyCopyrightSupportHelp / FAQAccessibilityPurchase helpAdChoicesPublishersSocial MediaCopyright © 2018 Scribd Inc. .Browse Books.Site Directory.Site Language: English中文EspañolالعربيةPortuguês日本語DeutschFrançaisTurkceРусский языкTiếng việtJęzyk polskiBahasa indonesiaSign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulMaster Your Semester with Scribd & The New York TimesSpecial offer for students: Only $4.99/month.Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York TimesRead Free for 30 DaysCancel anytime.Read Free for 30 DaysYou're Reading a Free PreviewDownloadClose DialogAre you sure?This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?CANCELOK