1 s t Semester, AY 2006-200;

BASIC TEXT: BOOK 1, REVISED PENAL CODE (REYES)

CRIMINAL LAW: DEFINITION AND SOURCES

A. Definition

B. State authority to punish crime

1. SourcesConstitution (1987), Art. II, Sec. 5

Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.

Constitution (1987), Art VI, Sec. 1

Section 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.

CASES:

People v. Santiago, 43 Phil 124 (1922)US v. Pablo, 35 Phil 94 (1916)

2. LimitationsConstitution (1987), Art. III, Secs, 1, 141112000 Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115

Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.

Civil Code, Art. 2

Art. 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion of their publication in the Official Gazette, unless it is otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect one year after such publication.

Visiting Forces Agreement

CASES: Pesigan v, Angeles, 129 SCRA 174 (1984)

Tai7k2da v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985) 1

3. Penological objectives

A. F. Tadiar Philosophy o4l a Penal Code, 52 Phil LJ 165 (1977,

C. BASIC PRINCIPLES

1. Generality of Criminal LawConstitution (1987), Art. VI, Sec. 1Civil Code, Art. 14

Art. 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.

- Art. Forces Agreement (VA), tArt. Vo See M.M. Magallona, Legal tsses in the PP-US Visiting Forces Agreement

(1999).

CASES: US v. Sweet, 1 Phil 18 (1901)Liang iang vs. People 355 SCRA 125

2. Territoriality of Criminal LawRPC, Art. 2

Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:

1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship

2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;chan robles virtual law library

3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number;

4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or

5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

Constitution (1987), Art. 1

I

ARTICLE I

NATIONAL TERRITORY.

The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.

VFA, Art. V(See Art. 163 & 166, RPC)

Art. 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins. — Any person who makes, imports, or utters, false coins, in connivance with counterfeiters, or importers, shall suffer:

1. Prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos, if the counterfeited coin be silver coin of the Philippines or coin of the Central Bank of the Philippines of ten centavo denomination or above.

2. Prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods and a fine of not to exceed P2,000 pesos, if the counterfeited coins be any of the minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the Philippines below ten-centavo denomination.

3. Prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P1,000 pesos, if the counterfeited coin be currency of a foreign country. (As amended by R.A. No. 4202, approved June 19, 1965).

Art. 166. Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer; importing, and uttering such false or forged notes and documents. — The forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or certificates or other obligations and securities payable to bearer and the importation and uttering in connivance with forgers or importers of such false or forged obligations or notes, shall be punished as follows:

1. By reclusion temporal in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos, if the document which has been falsified, counterfeited, or altered, is an obligations or security of the United States or of the Philippines Islands.

The word "obligation or security of the United States or of the Philippine Islands" shall be held to mean all bonds, certificates of

indebtedness, national bank notes, fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers of the United States or of the Philippine Islands, and other representatives of value, of whatever denomination, which have been or may be issued under any act of the Congress of the United States or of the Philippine Legislature.

2. By prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the falsified or altered document is a circulating note issued by any banking association duly authorized by law to issue the same.

3. By prision mayor in its medium period and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos, if the falsified or counterfeited document was issued by a foreign government.

4. By prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P2,000 pesos, when the forged or altered document is a circulating note or bill issued by a foreign bank duly authorized therefore.

CASE: US v. Ah Sing, 36 Phil 978 (1917)

Miquiabas v. Commanding General, 80 Phil 262 (1948)

3. Prospectivity of Criminal LawRPC, Arts. 21, 22

Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.

Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. — Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same.

Civil Code, Art. 4

Art. 4. Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.

CASE: Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA 420 (1971)

4. &Vlum Crimen Nu!la Poena Sine Lege (There is no crime when there is no Law, There must be no crime or punishment except in accordance with fixed, predetermined law)

RPC, Arts. 3, 21

Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos).

Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).

There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

CASES:

Bernardo v. People, 123 SCRA 365 (1983)People v. Pimentel, 288 SCRA 542 (1998)David vs. GMA, 489 SCRA 160, 259

5. Strict construction of ponal laws against State

Constitution (1987), Art. III, Sec. 14 (2)

(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.

CASE: Pascual v. Board of Examiners, 28 SCRA 344 (1969) D.

GENERAL PROVISIO~sS

RPC, Art. 1, 2

1:I FELONIES

A. FIC)"'JCOMP-M-FTED

I. Dolo,RPC, Art. 3

a. Elementsb. Presumption of Criminal Intentc. General and specific intentd. Intent and motive

CASES: People v. Temblor, 161 SCRA 623 (1988) People v. Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988) People v. Delos Santos, 403 SCRA 153 (2003)

e. Mistake of Fact

C AS F ES ~ US v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil 488 (1910) People v. Oanis, 74 Phil 257 (1943)

2. CulpaRPC, Arts. 3, 365

a. Elementsb. Distinguished from dolo

CASE: People v. Buan, 22 SCRA 1383 (1968) People vs. Pugay, 167 SCRA 439

C. C1101'OES DEFINED AND PENALIZED BY SPECIAL LAWS

Crimes mala in se and mala Prohibita

CASE: Estrada v. Sandiganbayan 369 SCRA 394 (2001)

2. Relation of RPC to special laws RPC, Art. 10

CASES:Padilla v. Dizon, 158 SCRA 127 (1988)Padilla Collet ol Appeals, 259 SCRA 402 (1997) People v. Sa ley, 291 SCRA 715 (1993) People v. 'Dimon, 234 SCRA 555 (1994) Ladonga v. People, 451 SCRA 673 (20015) People v. Bustinera, 431 SCRA 284 (2004.)

C. FU,"1671SHABLE CONDUCT

Wrongful act

different from that intendedRPC, Art. 4(1)

CASE: People v. Sabalones, 294 SCRA 751 (1988)

2 . O m i s s i o n RPC, Arts. 116, 137, 208, 223, 2234,A

+, 275Pres. Dec. Nos. 953, 1153

3 . Proposal and Conspiracy

RPC, Arts. 8, 115, 136, 141, 186, 306, 340

CASES: US v. Bautista, 6 Phil. 581 (1906)People v. Vengco, 127 SCRA 242 (1984) People v. Valdez, 159 SCRA 153 (1988) People v. Escober, 157 SCRA 541 (1988) People v. Elijorde, 306 SCRA 188 (1999) People v. Fabro, 325 SCRA 285 (2000) People v. Bello, 428 SCRA 388 (20.04) Li v. People, 427 SCRA 217 (2001) People v. Bagano, 375 SCRA 470 (2002) People v. Bangcado, 346 SCRA 189 (2000) People v. Ramos, 427 SCRA 299 (2004)

4 . A t t e m p t RPC, Art. 6

CASES: People v. Lamahang, 61 Phil 703 (1935) People v. Dio, 130 SCRA 151 (1984) People v. Trinidad, 169 SCRA 51 (1989) People v. Campuhan, 329 SCRA 270 (2000) People v. Listerio, 335 SCRA 40 (2000)

5 . Frustration RPC, Art.6

CASES: People v. Erinia, 50 Ph: ;!. 998 (1927) People v. O-.i'La, -184 SCRA 105 (1990) People v. Caballero, 400 SCRA 424 (2003)

6 . Consummation RPC, Art. 6

CASES: US v. Adiao, 38 Phil 754 4 (1955)People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil 980 (1925)

D. Classification of Felonies

1. Grave'2. Less Grave3. Light Felonies

RPC, Art. 9RPC, Art. 7

11,11

. CRIMINAL LIABILITY A. How

incurred

1. Commission of felony2. Wrongful act different from what was intended3. Impossible crimes

RPC, Art. 4

CASES: U rba no v. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 ( 1998) Intod v. CA, 215 SCRA 52 (1992)Quinto vs. Andres, 453 SCRA 511 (2005) People v. Valledor, 383 SCRA 653 (2001)

B. Circumstances affecting criminal liability

1. Justifying circumstances RPC, Art. 11

· SELF-DEFENSE, DEFENSE OF RELATIVES AND STRANGERS, DE F ENSE OF PROPERTY, DEFENSE OF REPUTATION

R.A. 9262 (27 March 2004) Sections 3 & 26 in relation to People v. Genosa, 419 SCRA 537 (2004)

CASES: People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389 (1983)People v. Bohol st-Ca ba I lero, 61 SCRA 180 (1974)People v. Alconga, 78 Phil 366 (1947) People v- Sumicad, 56 Phil 643 (1932) People v. Luague, 62 Phil 504 (1935) People v. Dela Cruz, 61 Phil 344 (1935) People v. Jaurigue, 76 Phil. 174 (1946) U~ v. Bumanglang, 14 Phil. 644 (1909) Toledo v. People, 439 SCRA 94 (2004) People vs. EnIfectana 381 SCRA 359 (2002) Cano v. People 413 SCRA 92 (2003) Balunueco v. CA, 401 SCRA 76People v. Dijan, 383 SCRA 15 (2002)

· STATE OF NECESSITY (AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL)

People v. Ricohermoso, 56 SCRA. 431 (1974) Ty v. People, 439 SCRA 220 (2004)

· FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT Civil (.ode, Art. 429

CASES: People v. Deli a, 46 Phil 738 (1922) People v. Oanis, 74 Phil 257 (1943) Pomoy v. People, 439 SCRA 439 (2004)

People v. Ulep, 340 SCRA 688 (2000)

· OBEDIENCE TO SUPERIOR ORDER

CASES: People v. Beronilla, 96 Phil 566 (1955)Tabuena v. Sandiaanbayan, 268 SCRA 332 (1997)

2. Exempting Circumstances RPC, Art. 12

· INSANITY AND IMBECILITY

CASES: In Re: M'Naghten, 8 Eng. Rep. 718 (reserve section

Library)People v. Tabugoca, 285 SCRA 312 (1998) People v. Madarang, 332 SCRA 99 (2000) People v. Bonoan, 64 Phil 87 (1937) People v. Taneo, 58 Phil 255 (1933) People v. Formigones, 87 Phil 658 (1950) People v. Valledor, 383 SCRA 653 (2002)

· MINORITY

R.A. 9344 Sec. 6 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006) RPC, Art. 80res. Dec. No. 603, Arts. 189 et seq.

~~-ule on Commitment of Children No. 02-1-19-SC)I -,

Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with Law (A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC)

CASE: People v. Doquena, 68 Phi: 580 (1939) Jose v. People, 448 SCRA 116(2005) Llane v. People, 438 SCRA 376 (200,S)

e. ACCIDENT

US v. Tanedo, 15 Phil. 196 (1910)People v. Bindoy, 56 Phil 15 (1931)

People v. Concepcion, 386 SCRA 74 (2002) People v. Agliday, 367 SCRA 273 (2001)

· IRRESISTIBLE FORCE-I F UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

People v. Using, 285 SCRA 595 (1998) People v. Elicanal, 35 Phil 209 (1916) US v. Caballeros, 4 Phil 350 (1905)

People v. Fronda, 222 SCRA 71 (1993) Ty v. People 439 SCRA 220 (2004)

· INSUPERABLE OR LAWFUL CAUSES

US v. Vincentillo, 19 Phil 118 (1911) People v. Bandian, 63 Phil 530 (1936) People v. Ventura, 433 SCRA 389

3. Mitiaatina Circumstances RPC, Art. 13

· INCOMPLETE JUSTIFICATION/EXEMPTION · UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OF AGE · NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG

CASES: People v. Ural, 56 SCRA 138 (1974) People v. Amit, 32 SCRA 95 (1970) People v. Regato, 127 SCRS 287 (1984) People v. Collet, 382 SCRA 43 (2002)

· SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT

People v. Pagal, 79 SCRA 570 (1977) Romero v. People 434 SCRA 467 (2004)

' ' `D IP i -J C,

ATE VF DILATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE

US v',Ampar, 37 Phil 201 (1917) People v. Parana, 64 Phil 331 (1937) People v. Diokno, 63 Phil 601 (1935) People v. Torpio, 431 SCRA 9 (2004)

· PASSION OR OBFUSCATION

People v. Muit, 117 SCRA 696 (1982) US v. Hicks, 14 Phil 217 (1909)

US v. Dela Cruz, 22 Phil. 429 (1912) People v. Germina, 290 SCRA 146 (1998) People v. Gonzalez, 359 SCRA 352 (2001) People v. Lab-eo, 373 SCRA 461 (2002) People v. Bates, 400 SCRA 95 (2003)

· VOLUNTARY SURRENDER

CASES:

People v. Coronet, 17 SCRA 509 (1966) People v. Pinta,

318 SCRA 270 (1999) People v. Amaguin, 229 SCRA 166 (1994) People v. Dulos, 237 SCRA 141 (1994) Andrade v. People, 452 SCRA 685 (2005).

· PLEA OF GUILT

People v. Crisostomo, 160 SCRA 47 (1988) People v.

Jose. et al., 37 SCRA 450 (1971) People v. Montinola, 360 SCRA 631 (2001) People v. Dawaton, 389 SCRA 277 (2002)

· PHYSICAL DEFECTS · ILLNESS

f.'JALOGOUS M I TIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

4. Aggravating Circumstances RPC, Art. 14

CASES: People v. Antonio, 393 SCRA 169 (2002) People v. Sueia, 373 SCRA 163 (2002) People v. Mendoza, 327 SCRA 695 (2000)

ADVANTAGE O F PUBLIC OFFICE RPC, Ark.

19(3)

CASES: People v. Capalac, 1117 SCRA 874 (1082)) People v. Gapasin, 231 SCRA 728 (1994) People v. Villamor, 373 SCRA 254 (2002)

L-

· IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO PUBLIC AUTHORITIES · V V ITH INSULT OR LACK OF REGARD DUE TO OFFENDED PARTY By R T HASON OF

RANK, AGE, OR SEX · DWELLING

People v. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981) People v. Daniel, 86 SCRA 511 (1978) People v. Bahez-, 301 SCRA 248 (1999) People v. Lapaz, 171 SCRA 539 (1989) People v. Taboga, 376 SCRA 500 (2002) People v. De Mesa, 354 SCRA A \ 397 (2001)

People v. Montinola, 360 SCRA 631 (2001) People v. Tano, 331 SCRA 448 (2000) People v. Rios, 333 SCRA

823 (2000) People v. Arizobal, 348 SCRA 143 (2000)

· ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE AND OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS

People v. Mandolado, 123 SCRA 128 (1983) People v. Arrojado, 350 SCRA 679 (2001)

· CC - \ Z I1'y 4 ,E IN PALACE OR IN PRESENCE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE · NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE OR WITH A BAND

RPC, Art. 296

CASES: People v. Jose, supraPeople v. Desalisa, 229 SCRA 35 (1994) People v. Silva, 387 SCRA 77 (2002) Peoplev. Ancheta, 431 SCRA 42 (2004) People v. Librando, 335 SCRA 232 (2000)

· ON OCCASION OF A CALAMITY · AID OR ARMED MEN OR MEANS TO ENSURE IMPUNITY

· RECIDIVISM RPC, Art. 160

CASE: People v. Molina, 336 SCRA 400 (2000) People v. Dacillo, 427 SCRA 528 (2004)

· R'- H iTERACION OR HABITUALITY RPC, Arts, 62(5), 160

CASE: People v. Gaorana, 289 SCRA 652 (1998) People v. Villapando, 178 SCRA 341 (1989) People v. Cajara, 341 SCRA 192 (2000)

· PR!CE. R E WARD OR PROMISE · INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON · EVID E NT PREMEDITATION

People v. Bibat, 290 SCRA 27 (1998) People v. Lug-aw, 229 SCRA 308 (1994) People v. Camilet, 142 SCRA 402 (1986) People v. llaoa, 233 SCRA 231 (1994) People v. Mondijar, 392 SCRA 356 (2002) People v. Torpio, supraPeople v. Bernal, 388 SCRA 211 (2002) People v. Biso, 400 SCRA 483 (2003)

· CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE

People v. Marquez, 117 SCRA 165 (1982) People v. Empacis, 222 SCRA 59 (1993) People v. Labuguen, 337 SCRA 488 (2000)

· SUPERIOR STRENGTH OR MEANS TO WEAKEN DEFENSE

People v. Cabato, 160 SCRA 98 (1988) People v. Ruelan, 231 SCRA 650 (1994) People v. Padilla, 233 SCRA 46 (1994) People v. Lobrigas, 394 SCRA 1-170 (2002' Pcople v. Barcelon, 389 SCRA 556 (2002) People v. Sansaet, 376 SCRA 426 (2002) People v. Ventura, 433 SCRA 389 (2004)

· TREACHERY

People v. Castillo, 289 SCRA 213 (1998) People v. Sangalang, 58 SCRA 737 (1974) People v. Gutierrez, 158 SCRA 614 91988) People v. Verchez, 233 SCRA 174 (1994) People v. Rendaie, 344 SCRA -1-38 (2000) People v. Um3yam, 381 SCRA 323 (2002) People v. Piedad, 30,3 SCRA 488 (2002) People v. Dumadag, 431 SCRA 65 (2004)

· IGNOMINY

People v. Siao, 327 SCRA 231 (2000) People v. Cachola, 420 SCRA 520 (2004; People v. Bumidang, 346 SCRA 807 (2000)

· UNLA" . " . f FUL ENTRY People v. Baello, 224 SCRA 218 (1993)

· BREAKING WALL, FLOOR, ROOF · WITH AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 OR BY MOTOR VEHICLE· CRUELTY

People v. Lacao, 60 SCRA 89 (1974) People v. llaoa, supraPeople v. Catian, 374 SCRA 514 (2002), People v. Guerrero, 389 SCRA 389 (2002)

SPECIAL AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE / QUALIFYING RPC, Art.

266-B

PD 1866 as amended by R.A. 8294 (06 July 1997) CASE:

)2000 k'

People v. Balgos, 323 SCRA 372 i People vs Ladjaalam, 340 SCRA 617 (2000)

5. Alternative CircumstancesRPC, Art. 15

· RELATIONSHIP CASE:

People v. Atop, 286 SCRA 157 (1998) People v. Marcos, 349 SCRA 537 (2001)

· INTOXICATION

People v. Renejane, 158 SCRA 258 (1988) People v. Camano, 115 SCRA 688 (1982)

· DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION

6. Absolutory Causes and Other Special Situations

a. Entrapment and Instigation

People v. Lua Chu, 66 Phil. 44 (1931) Araneta v. CA, 142 SCRA 532 (1986) People v. Pacis, 384 SCRA 684 (2002)

b. Effect of PardonRPC, Art. 23Rep. Act No. 8353

c. Absolutory CausesRPC, Arts. 6(3), 7, 20, 16, 247, 280, 332– 344

d. Acts not covered by law and in case of excessive punishment RPC, Art. 5

CASE: People v. Veneracion, 249 SCRA 244 (1995)

IV. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE

A. in Grave and Less Grave Felonies

1. PrincipalsRPC, Art. 17

a. by direct participation

CASES: People v. Nunag, 173 SCRA 274 (1989) People v. Dela

' Cerna, 21 SCRA 569 (1967) People v. Dacillo, 427 SCRA 528 (2004)

b. by induction

People v. Dela Cruz, 97 SCRA 385 (1980) US v. Indianan, 24 Phil. 203 (1913)

c. by indispensable cooperat ion People v. Montealegre,

1611 SCRA 700 (1988)

2. AccomplicesRPC, Art. 18

CASES: People v. Mandolado, supraPeople v. Doctolero. 193 SCRA 632 {1991) People v. Roche, 330 SCRA 91 (2000) People v. Pilola, 405 SCRA134People v. Garcia, 373 SCRA 134 (2002')

1

3. AccessoriesRPC, Arts. 1n.Presidential Decree No. 1612

CASE: People v. Talingdan, 84 SCRA 19 (1978) People v. To!entinc), 380 SCRA 171 (2002) People v. Mariano, 347 SCRA 109 (2000)

B. In Light Felonies

V. PENALTIES LTIES

A. General. Principles

1. No ex post facto laws and other Constitutional prohibitions RPC, Art. 21

Constitution (1987), Art. 111, Secs. 18(1) & (2), 19(1), 20, 22

CASES: In Re: Kay Villegas Kami, 35 SCRA 429 (1970) People v. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 (1972) People v. Bracamonte, 257 SCRA 380 People v. Valdez, 304 SCRA 611 (11999)

2. Prospectivity; Exception RPC, Arts. 21, 22 Civil Code, Art. 4

CASES: People v. Gallo, 315 SCRA 461 0999) People,,,-. Patalin, 311 SCRA 18-t (1999)

3. Effect of Repeal of Penal Laws

a. With reenactmentb. Without reenactment

CASE: People v. Pimentel, supra

B. Penalties which may be imposed RPC, Art. 25

1. Principal Penalties2. Accessory Penalties

C. Spccg`ic Principal and Accessory Pen: hies

1. Capital PunishmentRepublic Act No. 913-.0 ~,-;ng, the imposition oft de-ath penalry" Republic Act No. 7659Republic Act No. 8177 and Implementing Rules a,-i.d Reg-ilations Constitution (1987), Art. III, Sec. 19RPC, Arts. 40, 47, 81-85

CASES: People v. Echegaray, 257 SCRA 5,51 (11996)Echegaray v. Secretary of justice, G.R. No. 132601,

Resolution dated 4 and 19 January 1999 301 SCRA 96

People v. Esparas, et al. 260 SCRA 539 (1996) People v. Munoz, 170 SCRA 107 (1989)

2. Af f l ic t ive Penal t ies RPC, Arts. 27, 41-42

a. Reclusion Perpetua

i. As Indivisible Penalty

CASE: People v. Gatward, 267 SCRA 785 (1997) People v. Ramirez, 356 SCRA 595 (2001)

ii. Distinguish from Life Imprisonment People v.

Ballabare, 264 SCRA 350 (1996)

b. Reclusion Temporalc. Prision Mayor

3. Correctional Penalties

a. Prision Correcciona!b. Arresto Mayor

RPC, Arts. 27, 39, 43, 44

4. Light Penalties

a. Arresto Menorb. Public Censure

RPC, Arts. 27, 39, 44

5. Fc!nal'tles common to afflictive, correctional and light penalties

a. Fineb. Bond, to ke=p the peace RPC, Arts.

25, 26, 35, 66

C. Accessory PenaltiesRFC, Arls. 41-45

cr Temporary Absolute Disqualification;2. Perpetual or Temporary Special Disqualification;

from Public Office, tyre Fight to Vote and be Voted for, t ' ;z? Right to Practice a Profession or Calling;

4. Civil Interdiction;5. 1.-d mnh-tcat on or Confiscation oflnstruments or Proceeds of the

.-e . -anon Offense6. Payment of Costs

D. Measures Not Considered Penalty RP""', Art. 24Family Code, Art. 228-229

E. Application and Computation of Penalties 1.

Generally

RPC, Arts. 28, 29, 46

CASE:People v. Formigones, 87 Phil. 658 (1950)

2. Principals, Accomplices and Accessories in Consummated, Frustrated and Attempted Felonies

RPC, Arts. 46, 50-57, 60-61

CASE: People v. Campuhan, supra

3. Effects of Mitigating and Aggravating Circumstances RPC, Arts. 62-64, 67, 69CASE:

Lacanilao v. CA, 162 SCRA 563 (1988)1 F. Special Rules

1. Complex Crimes RPC, Art. 48

CASES: People v. Escober, supraPeople v. Hernandez, 99 Phil. 515 (1,9561. People v. Geronimo, 100 Phil. 99 (1956) Ponce Enrile v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217 (1990) People v. Tol~ng, 62 SCRA 17 (1975)!`J`onteverda. v. People, 387 SCRA 196 (2002) People v. Gonzalez,

359 SCRA 362 (20011) -People v. Comadre, 431 SCRA 366 (2004) People v. Delos Santos, 355 SCRA 415 (2001) People v. Velasquez, 345 SCRA 728 (2000)

2. Special Complex Crimes

People v. Fabon, 328 SCRA 302 (2000) People v. Empante, 306 SCRA 251 (1999)

3. Crime different from that intended RPC, Art. 49

4. Imposs ib le Cr imes RPC, Arts. 4(2), 59

5. Additional penalty for certain accessories RPC, Art. 58

6. Where the offender is below 18 years old RPC, Art. 68Presidential decree No. 603, Art. 192

7. The Three-Fold Rule RPC, Art. 70

CASE: Mejorada v. Sandiganbayan, 151 SCRA 339 (1987)

8. Where the penalty is composed of three periods RPC, Art. 65

G. The Indeterminate Sentence LawAct No. 4103 RPC, Art. 64

CASES:

Dela Cruz v. CA, 265 SCRA 299 (1996) People v. Campuhan, supraPeople v. Saley, supra

Execution and Service of Penalties1. Execution of Penalties

RPC, Arts. 78, 86-88Rules and Regulations to Implement RA No. 8177 In the

Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Pete C. Lagran, 363 SCRA 275 (2001)

2. E f f e c t s o f P r o b a t i o n L a w Presidential Decree No. 968 (as amended)

CASES:,Llamado v. CA, 174 SCRA 566 (1989) Baia v. I'vIlartinez, 181 SCRA 459 (1990) Salgado v. CA, 189 SCRA 304 (1990) Office of the Court Administrator v. Librado,

260 SCRA 625 (1996)

3. Suspension ins of Insanity or MinorityRepublic Act No. 9344RPC, Art. 79Presidential Decree no. 603, Arts. 189-204Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law, Sec. 32

V1. EX7NCTICN OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

A. Total ExtinctionRPC, Arts. 89-93, 36

CASES:

Monsanto v. Factoran, 170 SCRA 190 (1989) Presidential Ad Hoc Fact-Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Desierto, 363 SCRA 489 (2001) People v. Abungan, 341 SCRA 258 (2000) Recebido v. People, 346 SCRA 881 (2000)Del Castillo v. Torrecampo, 394 SCRA 221 (2002) People v. Patricia 341 SCRA 464 (2000)

B. Partial Extinction RPC, Arts. 94-99

Vla. CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM A FELONY

A. General RuleRPC, Art. 100Civil Code, Arts. 20, 1161, 2176, 2177

2000 Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 111

CASES - Quinto v. Andres, supraChua v. CA 443 SCRA 142 (2004)Basilio v. CA, 328 SCRA 341 (2000)Philippine Rabbit v. People 427 SCRA 526 (2004)

B. Special Cases

1. Insanity, Imbecility and those Over 9 and Under 15 Years of Age2. State of Necessity

3. Irresistible Force, Uncontrollable Fear of Greater or Equal Injury RPC, Art. 101

4. Innkeepers and Similar PersonsRPC, Art. 102

5. Subsidiary Liability of Other PersonsRPC, Art. 103

CASE. Carpio v. Doroja, 180 SCRA 1 (1989)

C. What Civil Liability Includes RPC, Arts. 104-108

D. Persons Civilly Liable RPC, Arts. 108-111

E. Extinction of Civil Liability RPC, Arts. 112-113Civil Code, Art. 12331

7