crim notes outline final exams (updated)

8/3/2019 Crim Notes Outline Final Exams (Updated)

1/21

Criminal Law 1 Outline Notes Final Exams

Page 1 of21

Article 70- Successive Service of Sentence

When the culprit has two or more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so

permit, otherwise the following rules shall be observed:

In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity shall be followed so that they may be executed

successively or as nearly as may be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed

or should they have been served out.

For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding par. the respective severity of the penalties shall be

determined in accordance with the following scale:

1) Death

2) Reclusion Perpetua

3) Reclusion Temporal

4) Prision Mayor

5) Prision Correccional

6) Arresto Mayor

7) Arresto Menor

8) Destierrro

9) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification

10) Temporary Absolute Disqualification

11) Suspension from public office, the right to vote & be voted for, the right to follow profession or calling

12 Public Censure

Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum periodof the convicts sentence shall notbe more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties upon him. No

other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same

maximum period.

Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty (40) years. In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties (penal perpetua) shall be computed at

thirty (30) years.

What is the rule when a convict is given multiple sentences?

The general rule is that he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties permit simultaneouservice of sentence. Otherwise, the penalties shall be served successively in the order of severity as prescribed

under this article.

Ex. Destierro and Fine Prision Correccional and Perpetual Special Disqualification Suspension From Office and Fine (Rodriguez vs. Dir. of Prisons-47 SCRA 353).


2/21


Page 2 of21

What are the limitations of the service of sentence?

a) The maximum duration of the convicts sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of timecorresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty to which he may be liable

shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period (3-fold rule).

b) Such maximum periodshall in no case exceed 40 years.What is the three-fold rule?

It is the rule that the maximum duration of the sentence should not exceed 3 times the most severe penaltyimposed upon the convict and the added limitation that the maximum period thus computed shall in no case

exceed 40 years.

How is the penalty computed?

Steps:1) Get the most severe penalty meted as listed under Art. 70;

2) Multiply the duration of the most severe penalty by 3;

3) Add the duration of all the different penalties;

4) Compare the results of steps 2 & 3;

5) Accused to serve the lesser period unless it is in excess of 40 years in which case the accused shall only

serve for 40 years.

Exs.1) Case of Paco Larranaga, et al- Sentence is two Reclusion Perpetua -Range- 20 years and 1 day to 40years.

- (Although the highest period is 40, we do not start it with the same, because the last provision of Art. 70provides: In applying the provisions of this rule, the duration of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua)

shall be computed at 30 years).

- 30 x 3= 90 years- Paco, et al will only serve 40 years bec. the law provides that shall in no case that the maximum

period exceed 40 years.

2) Conviction of four (4) PM-- Range- 6 yrs. & 1 day to 12 years- 12 x 3 = 36- Add the four penalties(12+12 + 12 + 12)= 48- Compare the two results = 36 years is lower, so this will be the penalty that will be served, as this does

not exceed 40 years.

3) Aspra vs. Director of Prisons- 85 Phil. 737-This applies to equal penalties:- ConvictionSix (6) Estafas-sentenced to 3 months and 11 days in each case.- 3 x 3= 9 mos. / 11 x 3= 33 days- = 9 mos. & 33 days or 10 mos. & 3 days


3/21


Page 3 of21

- Add all - ( 3+3+3+3+3+3)= 18 mos.- (11+11+11+11+11+11)=66 days- 18 mos. & 66 days or 20 mos. & 6 days- Accused will only serve the period of10 mos. & 3 days.

The three-fold rule applies although the penalties were imposed for different times and under separateinformations (Torres vs. Superintendent -56 Phil. 847)

The three-fold maximum penalty does not preclude subsidiary imprisonment. This means to say that after theprisoner has served the highest penalty under the three-fold rule, he still has to serve the payment of all

indemnities (fine) with or without subsidiary imprisonment provided the principal penalty does not exceed 6

years. So, if the prisoner after serving the three-fold maximum penalty cannot pay the fine, he still has to serve the

subsidiary imprisonment as long as the principal does not exceed 6 years (Bagtas vs. Dir. of Prisons- 47 O.G. l743).

Should the court refrain from imposing the correct penalties if these would exceed the limitation of the three-fold

rule?

NO. It is the duty of the court to impose the penalty for all crimes of which the accused was found guilty. Thisarticle deals with SERVICE OF SENTENCE and not Imposition, hence this article is for the Director oPrisons to follow and not for the court.

The rationale for imposing the correct penalty is that when the convict is pardoned, he will still serve the othersentences meted upon him.

Distinction between Imposition of Penalty & Service of Sentence:

The imposition of penalty is determined by the nature, gravity and number of offenses charged and provedwhereas,

service of sentence is determined by severity and character of the penalties imposed, in the impossibility orpracticability of the service of sentence, since actual service is a contingency, subject to various factors like escape

of the convict, grant of executive clemency, or natural death of the prisoner ( Pp. vs. Peralta, et al 25 SCRA 759).

Multiple Death Penalty- Reasons:

The imposition of multiple death penalties, far from being a useless formality, has practical importance. Thesentencing of an accused to several capital penalties is an indelible badge of his extreme criminal perversity

which may not be accurately projected by the imposition of only one death sentence irrespective of the number of

capital felonies for which he is liable.

Showing thus the reprehensible character of the convict in its real dimensions, the possibility of a grant oexecutive clemency is justifiably reduced in no small measure.

Hence, the imposition of multiple death penalties could effectively serve as a deterrent to an improvident grantof pardon or commutation. Faced with the utter delinquency of such a convict, the proper penitentiary authorities

would exercise judicious restraint in recommending clemency or leniency in his behalf.

Granting, however, that the Chief Executive, in the exercise of his constitutional power to pardon (one of thepresidential prerogatives which is almost absolute), deems it proper to commute the Multiple Death Penalties to

Multiple Life Imprisonments, then the practical effect is that the convict has to serve the maximum40 years o

multiple life sentences.

IfOnly One Death Penalty is imposed, and then is commuted to Life Imprisonment, the convict will have toserve a maximum of only 30 years corresponding to a single life sentence (Pp. vs. Jaime Jose, et al- Feb. 6, l971

37 SCRA 450; Pp. vs. Peraltaibid).


4/21


Page 4 of21

If the multiple penalties are death, how will the rule under Art. 70 be complied?- When the sentence isexecuted, all the death sentences are deemed simultaneously served (Pp. vs. Peralta- ibid).

Article 71-Graduated Scales

In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty , the

rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.

The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty.

The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:

SCALE NO. 1

1) Death

2) Reclusion Perpetua

3) Reclusion Temporal

4) Prision Mayor

5) Prision Correccional

6) Arresto Mayor

7) Destierro

8) Arresto Menor

9) Public Censure

10) Fine

SCALE NO. 2

1) Perpetual Absolute Disqualification

2) Temporary Absolute Disqualification

3) Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, and the right to follow a profession or calling

4) Public Censure

5) Fine

In Art. 70 the penalty next lower in severity to Arresto Mayor regarding the successive service of sentence isArresto Menor; but in Art. 71, as to graduated scales, the penalty next lower in degree to Arresto Mayor is

Destierro.

Ex. Pp. vs. Cabanban- May 7, l960- Accused was convicted of Simple Seduction which carries a penalty ofArresto Mayor. As he was under l8 at the time of the commission of the crime, the penalty imposed was Destierro.

Article 61- Rules of Graduating Penalties

For the purpose of graduating the penalties which, according to the provisions of Articles 50-57, inclusive of this Code

are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals or any frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories,

the following rules shall be observed:


5/21


Page 5 of21

1) When the penalty prescribed for the felony is SINGLE & INDIVISIBLE, the next penalty lower in degree shall be

that immediately following such scale prescribed under Art. 71;

Single and Indivisible penalties are Death and Reclusion Perpetua. - if the single penalty is Deathone degree lower to this is Reclusion Perpetua - if the single penalty is Reclusion Perpetua- one degree lower to this is Reclusion Temporal. Ex. Art. 267- Kidnapping & Serious Illegal Detention- punishable w/ Death- If the accused is only an Accomplice

penalty is Reclusion Perpetua.

2) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of TWO INDIVISIBLE penalties, or of ONE or MORE

DIVISIBLE penalties to be imposed to their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately

following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale;

a) Two indivisible penalties- Reclusion Perpetua to Death. Ex. Parricide (Article 248)- Reclusion Perpetua to Death. One degree lower to this- if the crime is frustrated- Reclusion Temporal. b) Divisible penalty imposed in its full extent- Prision Mayor - Penalty next lower in degree of PM is Prision Correccional Ex. Intentional Abortion- Art.256 (par. 2)- PM- if the crime is only frustrated- penalty is only Prision

Correccional.

3) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of One or Two Indivisible Penalties and the MaximumPeriod of Another Divisible Penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum

periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said respective scale;

Penalty prescribed consists of ONE or MORE INDIVISIBLE and the MAXIMUM of a DIVISIBLEPENALTY-next lower in degree consists of medium and minimum period of proper divisible penalty and the

maximum of the divisible penalty immediately following:

Reclusion Temporal maximum to Death Ex. Pp. vs. Paredes, Jr. Nov. l996- convicted of Murder (prior to RA 7659)- carries a penalty of Reclusion

Temporal Maximum to Death-

Period Penalty prescribed Maximum Death Medium Reclusion Perpetua Minimum Reclusion Temporal Max. One degree lower: Maximum Reclusion Temporal Med. Medium Reclusion Temporal Min. Minimum Prision Mayor Max. One degree lowerPrision Mayor max. to Reclusion Temporal medium.


6/21


Page 6 of21

4) When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of Several Periods, Corresponding to the Different Divisible

Penalties, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed

and of the two next following, which shall be taken from the penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty

immediately following in the above-mentioned respective graduated scale;

Ex. Penalty is Prision Mayor max. to Reclusion Temporal medium period-

Max. - Reclusion Temporal med. Med. - Reclusion Temporal min. Min. - Prision Mayor max. One degree lower: Max. - Prision Mayor med. Med. - Prision Mayor min. Min. - Prision Correccional max. One degree lower = Prision Correccional in its max. period to Prision Mayor in its medium period.Article 306- Brigandage- Prision Mayor in its medium period to Reclusion Temporal in its minimum period.

Max. - Reclusion Temporal min. Med. - Prision Mayor max. Min. - Prision Mayor med. One degree lower: Max. - Prision Mayor min. Med. - Prision Correccional max. Min. - Prision Correccional med. One degree lowerPrision Correccional in its medium period to Prision Mayor in its minimum period.

5) Penalty prescribed in a manner not provided in the preceding 4 rules- Court proceeds by analogy and shall impose

the corresponding penalty:

a) if the penalty prescribed by law is composed of 3 periods, the penalty lower in degree is the penaltyconsisting of3 periods down the scale;

b) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of 2 periods, the penalty next lower in degree is the penaltyconsisting of2 periods down the scale;

Ex. Penalty for Abduction(Article 343)- Prision Correccional in its min. and med. periods:

Prision Correccional med. Prision Correccional min. One degree lower- Arresto Mayor max.


7/21


Page 7 of21

Arresto Mayor med. c) if the penalty prescribed by law consists of one period, the penalty next lower in degree is the next period

in the scale:

Ex.Art. 166 (par. 5) Forging Treasury Notes- the penalty is Reclusion Temporal in its minimum period- penaltynext lower in degree is Prision Mayor in its maximum period

Reclusion Temporal min. Prision Mayor max. >>>In lowering the penalty by degree, aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not yet considered

because Art. 61 refers to the penalty prescribed for the felony . After the penalty next lower in degree is

determined, aggravating or mitigating circumstances are then considered to determine the proper period of penalty.

This is so, as in arriving at the imposable penalty, the following circumstances will be considered by the Court:

1) Stages of the commission of the crime( Consummated, Frustrated, Attempted) 2) Degree of participation (Principal, Accomplice, Accessory.) 3) Presence of Aggravating or mitigating circumstances; 4) Indeterminate Sentence Law 5) Probation (if the penalty does not exceed 6 yrs).

Art. 62- Rules for Application of Pen. w/ Regard to Mitigating & Aggravating Circumstance

-Effects of the attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency:

1) Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included

by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefore shall not be taken into account for the purpose of

increasing the penalty;

a) Those which in themselves constitute a crime especially punishable by law. Ex. Explosion (Art. 14, par. 12)Art. 324- Crimes involving Destruction (now amended by PD 1613- Law on Arson); by means of fire- crime

of Arson.

b) Those included by law in defining the crime-Abuse of confidence (Art. 14, par. 4)- crimes ofQualified Theft(Art. 310) and Estafa (Art. 315).

1(a) When in the commission of the crime, advantage was taken by the offender of his public position , thepenalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances.

The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any person who belongs to anorganized/syndicated crime group.

An organized /syndicated crime group means a group of 2 or more persons collaborating, confederating ormutually helping one another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime (As am. by RA 7659).

2) The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such degree that i

must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.

Ex. Evident premeditation- Art. 14, par. 13- crimes of Robbery w/ Force Upon Things (Art. 299) and Murder( Art. 248).


8/21


Page 8 of21

3) Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private

relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability

of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom each circumstances are attendant.

a) moral attributes of the offender- Passion or obfuscationIf A and B killed C and A acted with passion, suchmitigating circumstance will only affect A.

In rape- relationship as aggravating circumstance will be appreciated only against the person who is related tothe victim.

In Adultery- abandonment of the wife by the husband mitigates not only the liability of the wife, but also ofher paramour because in Adultery, the act is one, juridically (Pp. vs. Avelino40 O.G. 115).

4) The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall

serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of

the act or their cooperation therein.

a) material execution of the act- ex. If A cooperated with B in the killing of C who killed the latter withignominy. Such will aggravate not only the liability of B but also of A, if he has knowledge of it at the time of the

execution of the act.

b) means to accomplish the crime- ex. A induced B to kill C. A left to B the means he might employ to executethe act. B killed with treachery. Such agg. circ. will affect B only (Pp. vs. Otero- 51 Phil. 201).

but if A was present when B was killed, such aggravating circumstance will also affect him. In a PerCuriam decision, the Supreme Court held, that since there was conspiracy, the law should be appreciated

against the mastermind as a generic aggravating circumstance even when he was not present when the

crime was committed.

the Otero case was not held applicable as in that case the accused was convicted as principal by inducemenwithout proof of conspiracy with the other accused. In conspiracy, the rule is, every conspirator is

responsible for the acts of the other accused (Pp.vs.Pareja-30 SCRA- 693).

5) Effects of Habitual Delinquency-

Article 63- Rules for the application of aggravating and mitigating circ. on Indivisible Penalties-

1) Penalty is single and indivisible - penalty shall be applied regardless of the presence of mitigating or aggravating

circumstances. Death or Reclusion Perpetua.

2) Penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties - Reclusion Perpetua to Death.

i) one aggravating cir. present - higher penaltyDeath ii) no mit. nor agg. cir. present - lesser penaltyReclusion Perpetua iii) one mit. cir. present - lesser penaltyReclusion Perpetua.

2) When both agg. and mit. are present, the courts shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in considerationof their number and importance.

Article 64- Rules for the Application of aggravating and mitigating circ. On Divisible Penalties-

1) No aggravating and no mitigating circumstance - medium period;

2) One mitigating - minimum period;

3) One aggravating maximum period;


9/21


Page 9 of21

4) Mitigating and aggravating circumstances are presentoffset each other.

5) Two or more mitigating and no aggravating - one degree lower.

6) Any number of aggravating circumstances penalty cannot exceed the penalty provided by the law in its maximum

period.

Cases wherein Article 64 do not apply:

1) Penalty that is single and indivisible; 2) Felonies thru negligence; 3) Penalty is fine; and 4) Penalty is prescribed by special law.

Act 4103- Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL)

Purpose - is to uplift and redeem valuable human material and prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of personal

liberty and economic usefulness (Pp. vs. Onate- 78 SCRA 43).

As a rule, it is intended to favour the accused particularly to shorten his term of imprisonment, depending upon his behaviour

and his physical, mental, and moral record as a prisoner to be determined by the Board of Pardon and Parole.

Covers crimes punishable under the RPC or SPL:

A) RPC-

-Minimum - one degree next lower to the penalty imposed. The term of the minimum is left to the discretion ofthe court and this discretion is unqualified. The only limitation is that it is within the range of the penalty next lower

in degree to that prescribed by the RPC for the offense committed.

- Maximumthe penalty imposed as provided by law.B) SPLmaximum term of the indeterminate sentence shall not exceed the maximum fixed by law and the minimum shallnot be less than the minimum prescribed by law.

Pen. 1 year to 5 years - (1 year to 3 years or 3 years to 5 years).ISL will not apply in the following cases:

1) Offenses punished by Death or RP 2) Those convicted of Treason , Conspiracy or Proposal To Commit Treason, Misprision of Treason, Rebellion,

Sedition, Espionage, & Piracy.

3) Habitual Delinquents. 4) Those who escaped from confinement; 5) Those granted with conditional pardon and who violated the term of the same; 6) Those whose maximum period does not exceed one year. 7) Those already serving final judgment upon the approval of this act. Rationale - after serving the minimum term, the prisoner may be released on parole.


10/21


Page 10 of21

Examples :1) Convicted of HomicideAccused: Principal - crime is consummatedReclusion Temporal

Reclusion Temporal12 years and 1 day to 20 years Maximum17 years, 4 mos. & 1 day to 20 years; Medium14 years, 8 mos. & 1 day to 17 years and 4 mos. Minimum12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 mos. Prision Mayor- 6 years & 1 day to 12 yrs; Max.- 10 years & 1 day to 12 years Med.- 8 years & 1 day to 10 years Min.- 6 years & 1 day to 8 years Prision Correccional- 6 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs. Max- 4 yrs., 2 mos. & 1 day to 6 yrs. Med.- 2 yrs., 4 mos. & 1 day to 4 yrs. 2 mos. Min- 6 mos. & 1 day to 2 yrs. & 4 mos. During the trial, he pleaded guilty(Plea of guilt is an ordinary mitigating circ.) 12 years and 1 day to 14 years & 8 mos. Applying the ISL- one degree for the min. Prision Mayor min.6 yrs and 1 day to 8 yrs. Penalty - 6 yrs. & 1 day of PM in its min. period as its minimum to 14 years & 8 mos. of RT in its min. period

as its maximum.

ProbationPD 968 as am. - is a disposition under which a defendant, after conviction and sentence, is released subject to the conditions

imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer ( for those imposed the penalty of 6 years and

below).

Article 67- Increasing or reducing the penalty of Fines

A)If the law prescribes the minimum as well as the maximum - the court cannot impose a fine next higher.

Ex. Fine of P200 to P1,000 (each degree will be equal to of P1,000 or P250.00. P250.00 added to P1,000 to determine

the next higher in degree without changing the minimum of P200 = P 200 to P1,250.

Fine next lower in degree = P200 to P750.00

B)If the law imposing the fine does not fix the minimum, the determination of the fine is left to the discretion of the court

provided that it shall not exceed the authorized maximum - P4,000 ( P200 or P2,000)

Circumstances to be considered by the court: 1) Mitigating or agg. circs


11/21


Page 11 of21

2) Wealth or means of the culprit 3). Gravity or seriousness of the charge.

(Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan the SC reduced the P10,000 fine to P2,000 bec. of the presence of mitigatingcircumstance.

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

How is criminal liability extinguished?

1) Totally

2) Partially

ARTICLE 89- TOTAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY-

1) By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties, and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefore isextinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment;

2) By service of the sentence;

3) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effect;

4) By absolute pardon;

5) By prescription of the crime;

6) By prescription of the penalty;

7) By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Art. 344 of this Code.

1) DEATH

The criminal and civil liabilities are extinguished if the offender dies before final judgment (Pp. vs. Jose, et al- June 17

l976). This is so, as when death occurs, nobody will serve the penalty for the crime (Pp. vs. Bayotas- Sept. l994-55 SCAD &

Petralba vs. Sandiganbayan- Aug. 16, l991).

What is Final Judgment?

Sentencia firma should be understood as one which is definite. The legal import of the term final judgment issimilarly reflected in Articles 72 & 78 of this Code, which mention the term final judgment in the sense that it is

already enforceable.

Also Sec. 7 of Rule 116 of the Rules of Court states that a judgment in a criminal case becomes final after the lapseof the period for perfecting an appeal for when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served or thedefendant has expressly waived in writing the right to appeal.

Judgment becomes final when:

1) No appeal is seasonably perfected;

2) Accused commences to serve the sentence;

3) Right to appeal is expressly waived in writing, except where death was imposed by the trial court; and


12/21


Page 12 of21

4) Accused applies for probation, thereby waiving his right to appeal (Pp.vs.Salle-Dec.l995- En banc- 66

If death however, occurs after final judgment , the pecuniary liabilities devolve upon the heirs only if someproperties are left.

Article 89, par. 1 applies only if the civil liability arises from the criminal liability as its sole basis (Article 100Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable). However, it cannot apply if the civil liability

arises not only from the crime but from another source like a contract of purchase and sale. Ex. The accused wasconvicted of Estafa for selling a parcel of land twice. Pending appeal, he died. His civil liability was not

extinguished as it arose out of the contract of sale.

Under the Civil Code, the civil liability of the accused remains as this civil liability is independent of hiscriminal liability. If the accused dies while his case is pending appeal, the motion for recovery of money may not

be dismissed; but when he dies before final judgment by the trial court, the money claim should be presented

before the probate or intestate court (Torrijos vs. CA- L-40336, 67 SCRA 394).

The possible civil liability of the deceased accused can be determined in the exercise of appellate jurisdictionarising from the alleged criminal acts complained of as if no criminal case has been instituted against him and Art.

30 of the Civil Code will apply in determining his civil liability (Pp. vs. Sendaydiego- Jan. 20, l978).

This rule was applied in the case of Pp. vs. Tirol- L-30588- Jan. 31, l981- where one of the accused-appellants diedpending appeal, the case was dismissed as to his criminal liability, but the appeal was to be resolved concerning

him to determine his criminal liability as the basis of his civil liability for which his estate may be liable (Pp. vs

Naboa- 132 SCRA 410).

Does Art. 30 of the Civil Code authorize the appellate court to continue exercising appellate jurisdiction over the

accuseds civil liability ex-delicto when his death supervenes during appeal?

No. What Art. 30 recognizes is an alternative and separate civil action which may be brought to demand civilliability from a criminal offense independently of any criminal action.

The intendment of Article 100 on civil liability ex-delicto is rooted in the courts pronouncement of the guilt orinnocence of the accused. Death dissolves all things (Mors omnia solvi).

Article 30 refers to the institution of a separate civil action that does not draw its life from a criminal proceeding.How about the death of the offended party?-

The death of the offended party does not extinguish criminal liability, as it is not included in Art. 89. Neither is imentioned as one of the grounds for a Motion to Quash under the Rules on Criminal Procedure (Pp. vs. Bandalian-

117 SCRA 718).

2) SERVICE OF SENTENCE

Article 89 of the RPC stipulates that the penalties consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be executed and served in the

places and penal establishments provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law. The Code

thus requires that the service of sentence be in a penal institution (Martin vs. Eduardo 121 SCRA). Thus the period

during which the accused was at large during his escapes from the jail cannot be included in the service of his sentences in

fixing the date of his release (Ibid).

3) AMNESTY

Amnesty is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or a general pardon for a past offense, and israrely, if ever, exercised in favor of a single individual, and isusually exercised in behalf of a certain class ofpersons, who are subject to trial but have not yet been convicted.


13/21


Page 13 of21

Amnesty extinguishes the criminal liability & not merely the penalty but also its effects. But the civil liabilityis not extinguished.

4) ABSOLUTE PARDON

A) Pardon by the Chief Executive.

Pardon- is an act of graceproceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the laws whichexempts theindividual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed.

Two kinds of pardon:

2 kinds: a) Absolute

b) Conditional

a) Absolute Pardon - extinguishes criminal liability of the offender. But this does not exempt the offender from the

payment of the civil indemnity imposed in the sentence . It does not also restore the right to hold public office or the

right of suffrage unless such rights are expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.

A pardon to be effective, must be delivered and accepted. The pardon given by the President upon the womanconvicted of Adultery affects her only and cannot benefit the paramour ( U.S. vs. Guarin- 30 Phil. 85).

When may the right to hold public office and to exercise suffrage be considered restored although not expressly

stated in the pardon?

Only in a case when the pardon is granted after the offender has served the term of imprisonment, becausesuch conviction removes all that is left on the consequence of conviction( Cristobal vs. Labrado 71 Phil. 34). This

is the exception to the provisions of the law, that is, where the facts and circumstances of the case clearly show that

the purpose of the Chief Executive is precisely to restore rights although not expressly stated in the pardon (

Pelobello vs. Palatino- 72 Phil. 441).

Limitations of the pardoning power of the President:

1) Such power does not extend in cases of impeachment.

2) The power can only be exercised after conviction.

3) In election offenses, it can be exercised only upon prior recommendation of the COMELEC.

What is the effect of an appeal of judgment of conviction on the pardoning power of the President?

An appeal brings the entire case within the exclusive jurisdiction of the appellate court. The doctrine of separation opowers demands that such exclusive authority of the appellate court be fully respected and kept unimpaired.

Had not the present Constitution adopted the conviction by final judgment limitation, the President could, at anytime and even without the knowledge of the court, extend executive clemency to anyone whom he in good faith or

otherwise believes to merit presidential mercy. To allow the President to do so, will be a derogation of the

jurisdiction of the appellate court.

If an appeal is filed, an appellant may be granted pardon, but he must first withdraw his appeal, i.e. the appealedconviction must first be brought to finality.

b) Conditional Pardon ( Art. 94-par.1) - This must be accepted to be efficacious because of the conditions imposed

which must be complied strictly.

A Conditional Pardon is in the nature of a contract between the sovereign power or the Chief Executive andthe convicted criminal to the effect that the former will release the latter subject to the condition that if he does not


14/21


Page 14 of21

comply with the terms of the pardon, he will be recommitted to prison to serve the unexpired portion of the sentence

or an additional one (Alvarez vs. Dir. Of Prison80 Phil. 50).

By the pardonees consent to the terms stipulated in the contract, the pardonee has placed himself under thesupervision of the Chief Executive or his delegate who is duty-bound to see to it that the pardonee complies with the

terms and conditions of the pardon.

Under Sec. 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code, the Chief Executive is authorized to order the arrest & reincarceration of any such person who, in his judgment, shall fail to comply with the condition/s of his pardon

(Torres vs. Dir. of Bureau of Corrections- Dec. l995- 66 SCAD) and he can be prosecuted under Art. 159 of the

RPC.

May the grant of pardon be subject to the review of the courts?

No. It is now a well-entrenched rule in this jurisdiction that this exercise of presidential judgment is beyondjudicial review. The determination of the violation of the conditional pardon rests exclusively in the sound

judgment of the Chief Executive. The pardonee, having consented to place his liberty on conditional pardon upon

the judgment of the power that has granted it cannot invoke the aid of the courts, however erroneous the findings

may be upon which his recommendation was ordered (Tesoro vs. Dir. of Prisons- 68 Phil. 154).

Is a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus the remedy for a person incarcerated because of violation of the terms ofthe conditional pardon?

No. Habeas Corpus lies only when the restraint of a persons liberty has been judicially adjudged as illegal orunlawful. Solely vested in the Chief Executive, who in the first place was the exclusive author of the conditional

pardon and its revocation, is the corollary prerogative to reinstate the pardon.

Conditional pardon does not also extinguish civil liability (Monsanto vs. Factoran,Jr.- 170 SCRA l989 & Pp. vsNacional- Sept. l995- 64 SCAD).

B) Pardon by the Offended Party (Article 23)

This does not extinguish criminal liability, except in Art.266-C and Art. 344 of the RPC (amendment of the Anti-Rape Law) which requires a valid marriage between the rapist and the victim to effect an extinguishment of

criminal liability. But civil liability is extinguished by express waiver of the offended party.

The criminal action in Public Crimes is not extinguished. Thus, the criminal liability for Estafa is not affected bythe compromise or novation of contract, for it is a public offense which must be prosecuted and punished by the

government in its own motion even though complete reparation should have been made of the damages suffered by

the offended party (Javier vs. Pp. -70 Phil. 550).

Reimbursement of, or compromise as to the amount of the crime affects only the civil liability but does not relievehim from the penalty prescribed by the law for the offense committed (Pp. vs. Miranda- G.R.No. L- 16122).

Regarding Private Crimes, which are mentioned under Art. 344, like Rape, Seduction, Abduction, Acts oLasciviousness, Adultery and Concubinage, the criminal action is barred if:

a) the pardon is made before the institution of the action; b) in Adultery & Concubinage, the pardon must refer to both offenders, which may either be expressed or

implied;

c) in Rape, and other private crimes, the pardon must be expressed (Pp. vs. Infante- 57 Phil. 138); d) the marriage between the offender and the offended party totally extinguishes the criminal liability of the

offender.


15/21


Page 15 of21

In Rape cases, the pardon given by the parents of the minor victim to be effective must have the concurrence othe minor victim herself(Art. 266-C R.A. 8353).

Pp. vs. Lacson, Jr- The pardon given by the parents cannot stand alone. This is inefficacious. This is nosufficient to remove the criminal responsibility of the offender. Rather, this must be accompanied by the express

pardon of the victim herself( U.S. vs. Luna -1 Phil. 360 & Pp. vs. Tadulan-April l997- 81 SCAD).

What is the effect of an affidavit of desistance?

An affidavit of desistance is merely an additional ground to buttress the accuseds defenses, not the soleconsideration that can result to acquittal. There must be other circumstances which, when coupled with the

retraction or desistance, create doubts as to the truth of the testimony given by the witnesses at the trial and

accepted by the judge (Pp. vs. Ballabare- Nov. l996- 76 SCAD). All that the accused offered as defenses mainly

consisted of denial and alibi which cannot outweigh the positive identification and convincing testimonies given by

the prosecution (Pp. vs. Echegaray- Feb. l997- 79 SCAD).

Pardon by the Chief Executive distinguished from the Pardon by the Offended Party:

1) Pardon by the Chief Executive extinguishes criminal liability, whereas that is not the case if the Pardon is given

by the Offended Party except in case of marriage, as it only bars the institution of the criminal action;

2) Pardon by the Chief Executive is granted after conviction by final judgment, whereas pardon given by the

offended party is given before the institution of the action; and

3) Pardon by the Chief Executive cannot include the civil liability of the offender, whereas the civil liability may be

expressly waived by the offended party.

Distinction bt. Amnesty & Absolute Pardon

Amnesty Pardon

1.Application- gen. to poli- gen.to ordi-

tical crimes nary crimes

& offenders & offenders

2.Effect obliterates the relieves the

effects of con- offender of

viction as if the penalty but

act were not the effects of

criminal conviction stay

3.Congress concurrence concurrence

required not required

4. When given - even before after final

conviction conviction

5. To whom usually to class specific

Given of persons individual

E) PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME (Article 90)


16/21


Page 16 of21

Prescription of crimeIt is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a

certain time fixed by law.

Prescriptive periods:

a) Death, Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal 20 years

b) Afflictive penalties15 years

c) Correctional penalties10 years

Arresto Mayor5 yearsd) Libel or other similar offenses1 year

e) Oral Defamation & Slander By Deed6 mos.

f) Light offenses2 mos.

g) Compound crimehighest penalty shall be made the basis.

Computation of the Prescription of Offenses (Article 91)

The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offendedparty, the authorities or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shal

commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or acquitted, or are

unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender

is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.

Prescriptive period is not waivable. Since it is for the benefit of the accused, this cannot be extended. Onceprescription sets in, the court loses its jurisdiction.

In computing the period of prescription, the first day is excluded and the last day is included (Pp. vs. Galano- 75SCRA 193).

February 28 and 29 of a leap year as held in Namarco vs. Tuazon, should be counted as separate days incomputing the prescriptive period.

When the last day to file an Information falls on Sunday or legal holiday , the period of prescription cannot beextended to the next working day. So, this should be filed on the last working day before the legal holiday

(Yapdiangco vs. Buencamino, et al122 SCRA 713).

What is the effect of the delay in the reporting of crimes in its prosecution?

None. The law on prescription would be meaningless if we were to yield to the proposition that delay in theprosecution of crimes would be fatal to the State and the offended party.

In fixing the different prescriptive periods on the basis of the gravity of the penalty prescribed therefore, thelaw takes into account or allows reasonable delays in the prosecution thereof. In the case of Pp. vs. Gecomo -254

SCRA- the court ruled that 17 days, 35 days or even 6 mos. delay by a rape victim in reporting the attack on her

honor does not detract from the veracity of her charge.

Who is the offended party referred to in Art. 91?

State or the Private Complainant. The law does not make any distinction between a private crime or public crimeIn both cases then, the discovery may be by the offended party, the authorities or their agents ( Garcia vs. CA- Jan

l997- 78 SCAD). Besides, under Sec. 12, Rule 110 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the offended party is defined


17/21


Page 17 of21

as the party to whom the offender is civilly liable. Furthermore, under Art. 100, it is expressly stated that every

person criminally liable is civilly liable.

The Prescriptive Period is interrupted upon the filing of the case before the Prosecutors Office or that of the Officeof the Ombudsman ( Francisco vs. CA).

The Prescriptive Periods for the Crimes Punished under SPL - basis is Act no. 3326 - Prescription shall begin torun from the day of the commission of the violation of the law and if the same be not known at the time, from thediscovery thereof, and the institution of judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment (Presl. Ad Hoc

Committee on Behest Loans vs. Ombudsman- August 2001).

Sec. 52 of PD 1529 (Property Registration Decree) provides for constructive notice. Knowledge is counted athe time of registration. This constructive notice, in view of registration, does not apply to the registration of the

marriage contract in the crime of bigamy. This is so, as bigamous marriage is really entered in secrecy in order to

conceal the legal impediment (Pp. vs. Reyes- July 1989).

Can brief trips abroad qualify as absence as contemplated under Art. 91? No. This is not the absencereferred to in said article, as these trips were very brief.

Example: Slight Physical Injuries - inflicted on July 20, 2009 - prescriptive period is 2 mos.

a) If committed by a public official in relation to officeno need of going to the Lupong Tagapamayapa 31 days for July - 20 6042= 18 days -------- September 18, 2009- last 11 - July day of filing 31- August --------- 42 days b) If not a public official or a public official and the act is not in relation to officeundergo a conciliation at the

Lupong Tagapamayapa. Filing of the complaint at the barangay will toll the running of the prescriptive period but

only for 60 days and thereafter, the prescriptive period will again run.

F) PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY (Article 92)

Prescription of Penalty - It is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the government to execute the final sentence after the

lapse of a certain time fixed by law.

Prescriptive periods of penalties:

1) Death & Reclusion Perpetua- 20 years

2) Other afflictive penalties- 15 years

3) Correctional penalties10 years,

except Arresto Mayor5 years

4) Light penalties1 year


18/21


Page 18 of21

Computation of Prescription of Penalty (Art. 93)

Period commences to run from the date the culprit evades the service of sentence. It is interrupted:a) if the defendant surrenders;

b) if he is captured;

c) if he should go to foreign country w/ w/c the Philippines has no extradition treaty; and

d) if he should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.

Evasion of sentence is an essential element of prescription of penalties and takes place before the running of theperiod and cannot interrupt it.

ARTICLE 94- PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

1) Conditional pardon

2) Commutation of the sentence

3) Good conduct allowance which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence.

4) Parole (Under ISL)

5) Probation

6) Partial repeal of penal law

ARTICLE 96-COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE

The commutation of the original sentence for another of a different length and nature shall have the legal effect of

substituting the latter in the place of the former.

It is the change in the sentence of the court made by the President which consists in reducing the penalty imposed upon the

offender. Such substitutes the original penalty.

ARTICLE 97- ALLOWANCE FOR GOOD CONDUCT

The good conduct of a prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the following deductions from theperiod of his sentence:

1) 1st

two years5 days for each month of good behavior

2) 3rd

to the 5th

year - 8 days for each mo.

3) Following years to the 10th

year - 10 days each mo.

4) 11th

year and successive years15 days for each mo.

The allowance is given in consideration of the good conduct of the prisoner while serving his sentence (Pp. vsMartin-68 Phil. 122).

These allowances are granted by the Director of Prisons and once given, these cannot be revoked (ARTICLE 99). This right can be enjoyed even though the prisoner has been sentenced to several penalties and the same have been

cut down by Article 70 to three times the most severe of the penalties.


19/21


Page 19 of21

This does not embrace detention prisoners. Detention prisoners are entitled only to preventive imprisonment, if heagreed in writing to abide by the rules of the jail (Baking vs. Director of Prisons, et al. L-30603-28 SCRA 851).

ARTICLE 98- SPECIAL TIME ALLOWANCE FOR LOYALTY

A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded theservice of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Art. 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the

authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamityor catastrophe referred to in said articles.

When is the special time allowance given?

1) The occurrence of disorder resulting from a conflagration, earthquake, explosion or similar catastropheor a mutiny in which the prisoner did not participate;

2) The convict must evade the service of his sentence (This article does not apply to the prisoners who didnot escapeLozada vs. Acenas78 Phil. 226);

3)He must give himself up w/n 48 hours after the issuance of a proclamation by the President announcingthe passing away of such calamity.

Loyalty award - 1/5 deduction of the period of his sentence. If he does not return, additional 1/5 of the termremaining to be served will be imposed, but not to exceed 6 months.

ARTICLE 48-COMPLEX CRIMES

In complex crimes, although two or more crimes are actually committed, they constitute only one crime in the eyes o

the law as well as in the conscience of the offender. The offender has only one criminal intent. Even in the case where an

offense is a necessary means to commit the other, the evil intent of the offender is only one (Pp. vs. Hernandez- 99 Phil. 515)

It is on this basis that the law imposed only one penalty.

Two kinds of Complex Crimes:

1) Compound (Delito Compuesto)- when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies;

2) Complex Crime Proper (Delito Complejo)- when an offense is a necessary means of committing another crime

1) Compound Crimes: single act results to:

a) two or more grave felonies

Example:. Pp. vs. Guillen47 O.G. 3433- single act of throwing a hand grenade resulted to the death of SimeonVarela (Murder) and attempts on the lives of many others (Multiple Attempted Murders) - Murder is a grave

felony, same with Attempted Murders.

One single shot which resulted to the death of two personsDouble Homicide ( Pp. vs. Pama- 44 O.G. 3339)Both Homicides are grave felonies.

When a person planted a bomb in the airplane, resulting to its explosion and death of several peoplemultiplemurders and damage to property (Pp. vs. Largo99 Phil. 1061);

Where a paper bag was given by the accused to the occupant of the house containing some vegetables but whenopened, it exploded resulting to the death of several persons and injuring anothercomplex crime of Multiple

Murder with Frustrated Murder Pp. vs. Villaflores 115 SCRA 570 and Pp. vs. Carpo, et al April 2001- 149

SCAD.

Pp.vs. Paculba- 124 SCRA 383- single act of firing shot resulting to the death of one and mortally injuring theotherMurder w/ Frustrated Murder.


20/21


Page 20 of21

However, if the accused fired several bullets in succession from a submachine gun with a single pull of thetrigger, killing several persons, the same is not covered under this rule, because this is not considered one act

The continued pressing of the trigger of the gun is not considered one act. This is not a complex crime.

b) less grave and grave:

When a mayor while in the performance of his duties was ambushed and killed, Direct Assault with Murder.c) less grave and less grave:

A Judge was being attacked in relation to the performance of his function resulting to less serious physicainjuriescrime is Direct Assault with Less Serious Physical Injuries (U. S. vs. Montiel9 Phil. 162).

There is No Complex Crime ofRape with Homicide in view of the new law-RA 8353. Same with Arson with

Homicidebecause of RA 1613.

When a Single Act Results in a)grave felony and a light felony; or b)grave or less grave and an offense punished

under Special Law, there is No Complex Crime.

Example: Accused act of stabbing one person killing him and at the same time hitting another resulting onlyto slight injuriesno complex crime but two crimes of Homicide and Slight Physical Injuries.

Lontok, Jr. vs. Judge GorgonioApril 30,l979- While driving his car, accused bumped another car resulting to adamage of only P2,000 and at the same time injuring its driver with only slight injuriesno complex crime bu

two crimes of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Damage to Property (Less Grave felony) and Reckless

Imprudence Resulting to Slight Physical InjuriesLight Offense.

Another reason why there is no complex crime of grave felony and light, its because the latter is usually absorbed. Pp. vs. Lawas- 97 Phil. 975- Lawas ordered the Moros to be tied in order to be brought to another place. When

one of the guards approached Datu Lomangcolob, the latter refused, thereupon, Lawas fired his revolver at him

and ordered the guards to fire; the guards following instructions fired at the Moros including those who tried to

escape. After a short time, Lawas ordered his men to cease fire and the firing stopped. The evidence positively

shows that the killing was of a single impulse, which was induced by the order of the leader to fire.

The Supreme Court held that if the act or acts complained of resulted from a single criminal impulse, itconstitutes a single offense.

The ruling in the Lawas case applies only when there is no evidence at all to show the number of persons killedby each of the several defendants.

Under recent rulings, the single criminal impulse, same motive or the single purpose theory has no legabasis, for Art. 48 speaks of a single act.However, the theory is acceptable when it is not certain who among

the accused killed or injured each of the victims.

2) Complex Crime Proper: When an offense is committed as a means necessary to commit another.

The phrase necessary means has been interpreted not to mean indispensable means because if it did, then theoffense as a necessary means to commit another would be an element of the other crime . Itsimply means such anoffense is committed to facilitate and insure the commission of the other (Pp. vs. Hernandez).

Example: 1) Pp. vs. Jaqueline Limshe changed the amount in the check from P2,000 to P20,000 and as a resulof which, she was able to misappropriate P18,000, public funds Malversation of Public Funds Through

Falsification of Commercial Document;

2) Pp. vs. Mayor Maamo, et al- made it appear in the payroll that a particular person worked in the Clean andGreen Projectand received P1,600 when in truth and in fact said person is already dead. Malversation o

Public Funds Through Falsification of a Public/Official Document.


21/21


Page 21 of21

But if the other crime is used to conceal the other crime, then this is not a complex crime proper, but twocrimes.

There is no complex crime of Rebellion with common crimesEnrile vs. Judge Salazar. In these two situations (Compound and Complex Crime Proper)- the penalty that will be imposed is the penalty of

the crimes which is higher and to be applied in the maximum.

PLURALITY OF CRIMES

consists in the successive execution by the same individual of different criminal acts upon any of which noconviction has yet been declared.

Continued, Continuous or Continuing Crime- is a single crime consisting of a series of act arising from one

criminal resolution and is therefore not a complex crime. The reason here is that neither the criminal act nor the

intention is susceptible of division (Pp. vs. Bayot).

A) Continued Crimes:

a) Pp. vs. De Leon- 49 Phil. 347- Taking by the accused from the yard of a house two roosters belonging to twodifferent owners- is one Theft only because the two acts of taking arose from one criminal resolution.

b) Pp. vs. Jaranilla- 55 SCRA 563- Taking of 6 roosters from a chicken coop considered single offense. c) Pp. vs. Emit- G.R. No. L- 13477- accused run amok and killed several persons, only one crime of Murder. d) Santiago vs. Garchitorena- 46 SCAD or 228 SCRA- there was only one crime committed, thus the 32

Informations filed should be changed into one , as this falls under the so-called Delito Continuado or

Continued Crime or Continuous Crime. The original information charged her of approving the application for

legalization of several aliens not qualified under the law. This was committed more or less on October 17

1988.So the approval could be done by a single stroke of the pen.

B) Transitory crime- is also called a Moving Crime- where the elements of the crimes happened in different places

hence the criminal action can be instituted in the places where any of the elements happened.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention if kidnapped in Cebu and detained Mandauethis can be filed inany of these places.

BP 22- Check was issued in Makati City, but delivered in Cebu City in payment of the goods obtained canbe filed either in the place of the issuance of the check or the place where it was used or delivered ( Pp. vs

Yabut).

C) Continuing crime- Ex- offense which is continuing at timeRebellionGarcia-Padilla vs. Enrile121 SCRA.

Squatting is a continuous crime (Dacutanan vs. Pp.August l990).D) Special Complex crimesRobbery with Homicidehas a penalty of its own under Art. 294.

crim notes outline final exams (updated)

Documents