DAY 3 (PM) Criminal Law Flashcards
1) The wife of AAA predeceased his mother-in-law. AAA was accused of defrauding his mother-in-law under a criminal information for estafa, but the actual recital of facts of the offense charged therein, if proven, would constitute not only the crime of estafa, but also falsification of public document as a necessary means for committing estafa. AAA invokes the absolutory cause of relationship by affinity.
Which statement is most accurate?
a) The relationship by affinity created between AAA and the blood relatives of his wife is dissolved by the death of his wife and the absolutory cause of relationship by affinity is therefore no longer available to AAA.
b) The death of spouse does not severe the relationship by affinity which is an absolutory cause available to AAA for estafa through falsification of public document.
c) If AAA commits in a public document the act of falsification as a necessary means to commit estafa, the relationship by affinity still subsists as an absolutory cause for estafa which should be considered separately from the liability for falsification of public document because there is no specific penalty prescribed for the complex crime of estafa through falsification of public document.
d) Considering that under the given situation, the two (2) crimes of estafa and falsification of public document are not separate crimes but component crimes of the single complex crime of estafa and falsification of public document, the absolutory cause of relationship by affinity is not available to AAA.
d) Considering that under the given situation, the two (2) crimes of estafa and falsification of public document are not separate crimes but component crimes of the single complex crime of estafa and falsification of public document, the absolutory cause of relationship by affinity is not available to AAA.
There are two (2) views on whether the extinguishment of marriage by death of the spouse dissolves the relationship by affinity for purpose of absolutory cause.
The first holds that relationship by affinity terminates with the dissolution of the marriage, while the second maintains that relationship continues even after the death of the deceased spouse. The principle of pro reo calls for the adoption of the continuing affinity view because it is more favourable to the accused. However, the absolutory cause applies to theft, swindling, and malicious mischief. It does not apply to theft through falsification or estafa through falsification.
(Intestate estate of Gonzales v. People, G.R. No. 181409, February 11, 2010)
2) Under which of the following circumstances is an accused not liable for the result not intended?
a) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake in the identity of the victim.
b) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake in the blow.
c) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when the wrongful act is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury.
d) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake of fact constituting an involuntary act.
d) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake of fact constituting an involuntary act.
The Supreme Court in several cases had applied the “mistake of fact” doctrine in relation to the:
a) justifying circumstance of self-defense (United States v. Ah Chong, G.R. No. L-5272, March 19, 1910);
b) defense of person and right (US v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-10678, August 17, 1915);
c) defense of honor (United States v. Apego, G.R. No. L-7929, November 18, 1912);
d) performance of duty (People v. Mamasalaya, G.R. No. L-4911, February 10, 1953); and
e) the exempting circumstance of obedience of an order of superior officer (People v. Beronilla, G.R. No. L-4445, February 28, 1955).
Hence, mistake of fact principle can likewise be applied in relation to circumstance of lack of voluntariness, such as the circumstance of irresistible force or uncontrollable fear. In sum, the accused will not be held criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake of fact constituting an involuntary act.
2) Under which of the following circumstances is an accused not liable for the result not intended?
a) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake in the identity of the victim.
b) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake in the blow.
c) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when the wrongful act is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury.
d) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when there is mistake of fact constituting an involuntary act.
Alternative answer
c) Accused is not criminally liable for the result not intended when the wrongful act is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury.
3) Can there be a frustrated impossible crime?
a) Yes. When the crime is not produced by reason of the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, it is a frustrated impossible crime.
b) No. There can be no frustrated impossible crime because the means employed to accomplish the crime is inadequate or ineffectual.
c) Yes. There can be a frustrated impossible crime when the act performed would be an offense against persons.
d) No. There can be no frustrated impossible because the offender has already performed the acts for the execution of the crime.
d) No. There can be no frustrated impossible because the offender has already performed the acts for the execution of the crime.
3) Can there be a frustrated impossible crime?
a) Yes. When the crime is not produced by reason of the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, it is a frustrated impossible crime.
b) No. There can be no frustrated impossible crime because the means employed to accomplish the crime is inadequate or ineffectual.
c) Yes. There can be a frustrated impossible crime when the act performed would be an offense against persons.
d) No. There can be no frustrated impossible because the offender has already performed the acts for the execution of the crime.
Alternative answer
b) No. There can be no frustrated impossible crime because the means employed to accomplish the crime is inadequate or ineffectual.
If one performed all the acts of execution but the felony was not produced, the crime committed is either frustrated felony or impossible crime and not frustrated impossible crime.
If the felony, despite the performance of all acts of execution, was produced due to the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means to accomplish it, the crime committed is impossible crime.
(Example: If the accused with intent to kill thought that the salt, which he mixed with the coffee of another, is arsenic powder, he is liable for impossible crime - People v. Balmores, G.R. No. L-1896, February 16, 1950).
If the means employed to accomplish the felony was not produced by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator, the crime committed is frustrated felony.
(Example: The offender with intent to kill mixed arsenic with the coffee of another. The latter did not die not by reason of inadequate quantity of the poison to kill but due to the timely medical intervention. In this case, the offender is liable for frustrated murder)
Hence, the answer is “B”.
4) FF and his two (2) sons positioned themselves outside the house of the victim. The two (2) sons stood by the stairs in front of the house, while the father waited at the back. The victim jumped out of the window and was met by FF who instantly hacked him. The two (2) sons joined hacking the victim to death. They voluntarily surrendered to the police. How will the attendant circumstances be properly appreciated?
a) Treachery and abuse of superior strength qualify the killing to murder.
b) Only treachery qualifies the killing to murder because abuse of superior strength is absorbed by treachery.
c) Treachery is the qualifying aggravating circumstance, while abuse of superior strength is treated as a generic aggravating circumstance.
d) The qualifying circumstance of treachery or abuse of superior strength can be offset by the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.
d) The qualifying circumstance of treachery or abuse of superior strength can be offset by the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.
Abuse of superior strength is an aggravating circumstance if the accused purposely uses excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked, or if there is notorious inequality of forces between the victim and aggressor, and the latter takes advantage of superior strength (People v. Del Castillo, G.R. No. 169084, January 18, 2012).
If the victim is completely defenseless, treachery should be appreciated. When the circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in the latter (People v. Rebucan, G.R. No. 182551, July 27, 2011).
What should qualify the crime is treachery as proved and not abuse of superior strenght (People v. Loreto, G.R. No. 137411-137413, February 28, 2003).
See also People v. Perez, G.R. No. 181409, Feburary 11, 2010.
5) Which of the following circumstances may be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty to be imposed upon the convict?
a) Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law.
b) Aggravating circumstances which are inherent in the crime to such a degree that they must of necessity accompany the crime.
c) Aggravating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender.
d) Aggravating circumstances which are included by the law in defining a crime.
c) Aggravating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender.
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 therefor shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must be a necessary accompany to the commission thereof. Aggravating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the principals, accomplices, and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant (Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code). Hence, aggravating circumstances involving moral attributes should be taken into consideration in increasing the penalty to be imposed upon the convict.
6) Who among the following convicts are not entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law?
a) Those who are recidivists.
b) Those whose maximum term of imprisonment exceeds one (1) year.
c) Those convicted of inciting to sedition.
d) Those convicted of misprision of treason.
d) Those convicted of misprision of treason.
Recidivists, those convicted of inciting to sedition, and those whose term of imprisonment exceeds one year are entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law; while those convicted of misprision of treason are not.
7) Proposal to commit felony is punishable only in cases in which the law specifically provides a penalty therefor.
Under which of the following instances are proponents NOT liable?
a) Proposal to commit coup d’etat
b) Proposal to commit sedition
c) Proposal to commit rebellion
d) Proposal to commit treason
b) Proposal to commit sedition
Proposal to commit treason, rebellion, or coup d’ etat is punishable but proposal to commit sedition is not.
8) AA misrepresented to the complainant that he had the power, influence, authority and business to obtain overseas employment upon payment of placement fee. AA duly collected the placement fee from complainant. As per certification of the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration, AA did not possess any authority or license for overseas employment.
Is it proper to file two (2) separate Informations for illegal recruitment under the Labor Code and for estafa by means of deceit?
a) No. The filing of two (2) separate Informations for illegal recruitment under the Labor Code and for estafa by means of deceit for the same act is violative of the principle against double jeopardy.
b) No. One Information for a complex crime of illegal recruitment with estafa by means of deceit should be filed, instead of two (2) separate Informations.
c) No. A person convicted of illegal recruitment under the Labor Code may not, for the same act, be separately convicted of estafa by means of deceit.
d) Yes. A person convicted of illegal recruitment under the Labor Code may, for the same act, be separately convicted of estafa by means of deceit.
d) Yes. A person convicted of illegal recruitment under the Labor Code may, for the same act, be separately convicted of estafa by means of deceit.
It is well-settled that a person who has committed illegal recruitment may be charged and convicted separately of the crime of illegal recruitment under R.A. No. 8042 and estafa. The reason for the rule is that the crime of illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum where the criminal intent of the accused is not necessary for conviction, while the crime of estafa is malum in se where the criminal intent of the accused is necessary for conviction. In other words, a person convicted under R.A. No. 8042 may also be convicted of offenses punishable by other laws (People v. Logan, G.R. No. 135030-135033, July 20, 2011). Moreover, although the two crimes may arise from the same facts, they are not the same. Not all facts, which constitute estafa, necessarily establish illegal recruitment, for estafa is wider in scope and covers deceits whether or not related to recruitment activities. More importantly, the element of damage, which is essential in estafa cases, is immaterial in illegal recruitment (People v. Turda, G.R. No. 97044, July 6, 1994).
9) When are light felonies punishable?
a) Light felonies are punishable in all stages of execution.
b) Light felonies are punishable only when consummated.
c) Light felonies are punishable only when consummated, with the exception of those committed against persons or property.
d) Light felonies are punishable only when committed against persons or property.
c) Light felonies are punishable only when consummated, with the exception of those committed against persons or property.
Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated, with the exception of those committed against person or property (Article 7 of the Revised Penal Code).
10) AA was appointed for a two-year term to serve the unexpired portion of a resigned public official. Despite being disqualified after the lapse of the two-year term, PA continued to exercise the duties and powers of the public office to which appointed.
What is the criminal liability of AA?
a) AA is criminally liable for malfeasance in office.
b) AA is criminally liable for prolonging performance of duties and powers.
c) AA is criminally liable for disobeying request for disqualification.
d) AA incurs no criminal liability because there is no indication that he caused prejudice to anyone.
b) AA is criminally liable for prolonging performance of duties and powers.
The crime of prolonging performance of duties and powers is committed by any public officer who shall continue to exercise the duties and powers of his office, employment, or commission, beyond the period provided by law, regulations, or special provisions applicable to the case.
(Article 237 of the Revised Penal Code)
11) For treachery to qualify killing to murder, the evidence must show _____________.
a) the time when the accused decided to employ treachery, the overt act manifestly indicating that he clung to such determination, and a sufficient lapse of time between the decision and the execution, allowing him to reflect upon the consequence of his act
b) unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means to prevent or repel the aggression, and lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the victim
c) that the accused employed such means, methods or manner to ensure his safety from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim, and the mode of attack was consciously adopted
d) actual sudden physical assault or threat to inflict real imminent injury to an unsuspecting victim
c) that the accused employed such means, methods or manner to ensure his safety from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim, and the mode of attack was consciously adopted
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make (Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code).
12) What is the criminal liability, if any, of a pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide by poison, but she did not die and the fetus in her womb was expelled instead?
a) The woman who tried to commit suicide is not criminally liable because the suicide intended was not consummated.
b) The woman who tried to commit suicide is criminally liable for unintentional abortion which is punishable when caused by violence.
c) The woman who tried to commit suicide is criminally liable for abortion that resulted due to the poison that she had taken to commit suicide.
d) The woman who tried to commit suicide occurs no criminal liability for the result not intended.
d) The woman who tried to commit suicide occurs no criminal liability for the result not intended.
The pregnant woman cannot be held liable for abortion because intent to abort, which is an essential element of this crime, is lacking. Neither can she be held liable for unintentional abortion, because the element of violence is wanting.
Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended (Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code). Attempt to commit suicide, although an intentional act, is not constituting of felony. According to Justice Luis B. Reyes, “a person who attempts to commit suicide is not criminally liable, because the society has always considered a person who attempts to kill herself as an unfortunate being, a wretched person more deserving of pity rather than of penalty.” Hence, the woman, who tried to commit suicide, is not liable for the direct, natural, and logical consequence of her non-felonious act.
13) Chris Brown was convicted of a complex crime of direct assault with homicide aggravated by the commission of the crime in a place where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal. On the other hand, the penalty for direct assault is prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods. What is the correct indeterminate penalty?
a) Twelve (12) years of prision mayor as minimum to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal as maximum.
b) Ten (10) years of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
c) Eight (8) years of prision mayor as minimum to eighteen (18) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
d) Twelve (12) years of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
a) Twelve (12) years of prision mayor as minimum to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal as maximum.
In People v. Rillorta, G.R. No. 57415, December 15, 1989, and in People v. Recto, G.R. No. 129069, October 17, 2001, the Supreme Court En Banc found the accused guilty of the complex crime of homicide with assault upon a person in authority and sentence him to suffer an indeterminate penalty ranging from twelve (12) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twenty years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
14) A, B, and C organized a meeting in which the audience was incited to the commission of the crime of sedition. Some of the persons present at the meeting were carrying unlicensed firearms.
What crime, if any, was committed by A, B and C, as well as those who were carrying unlicensed firearms and those who were merely present at the meeting?
a) Inciting to sedition for A, B and C and illegal possession of firearms for those carrying unlicensed firearms
b) Inciting to sedition for A, B and C and those carrying unlicensed firearms
c) Illegal assembly for A, B, C and all those present at the meeting
d) Conspiracy to commit sedition for A, B, C and those present at the meeting
c) Illegal assembly for A, B, C and all those present at the meeting
Inciting to sedition is not committed since there is no showing that the audience was incited by “A”, “B”, and “C” themselves to commit sedition. Conspiracy to commit sedition is not committed since there is no showing that the organizers and audience agreed and decided to commit sedition. The crime committed is Illegal Assembly under Article 146 of the Revised Penal Code. This crime is committed by organizers or leaders of a meeting in which the audience was incited to the commission of the crime of sedition. Persons merely present at such meeting shall likewise be held criminally liable.
15) Is the crime of theft committed by a person who, with intent to gain, takes a worthless check belonging to another without the latter’s consent?
a) Yes. All the elements of the crime of theft are present: that there be taking of personal property; that the property belongs to another; and that the taking be done with intent to gain and without the consent of the owner.
b) No. The taking of the worthless check, which has no value, would not amount to the crime of theft because of the legal impossibility to commit the intended crime.
c) Yes. Theft is committed even if the worthless check would be subsequently dishonored because the taker had intent to gain from the check at the time of the taking.
d) Yes. Theft is committed because the factual impossibility to gain from the check was not known to the taker or beyond his control at the time of taking.
b) No. The taking of the worthless check, which has no value, would not amount to the crime of theft because of the legal impossibility to commit the intended crime.
Stealing a worthless check constitutes impossible crime. There is impossibility to accomplish the crime of theft since the check has no value.
(Jacinto v. People, G.R. No. 162540, July 13, 2009)
16) B was convicted by final judgment of theft. While serving sentence for such offense, B was found in possession of an unlicensed firearm. Is B a quasi-recidivist?
a) B is a quasi-recidivist because he was serving sentence when found in possession of an unlicensed firearm.
b) B is not a quasi-recidivist because the offense for which he was serving sentence is different from the second offense.
c) B is not a quasi-recidivist because the second offense is not a felony.
d) B is not a quasi-recidivist because the second offense was committed while still serving for the first offense.
17) What crime is committed by one who defrauds another by taking undue advantage of the signature of the offended party in a blank check and by writing the payee and amount of the check to the prejudice of the offended party?
a) estafa with unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence
b) estafa by false pretense
c) estafa through fraudulent means
d) estafa by other deceits
18) What crime is committed by a person who kills a three-day old baby?
a) infanticide
b) homicide
c) murder
d) parricide
19) What crime is committed by a person who kills his legitimate brother on the occasion of a public calamity?
a) parricide
b) homicide
c) murder
d) death caused in a tumultuous affray
20) What is the crime committed by any person who, without reasonable ground, arrests or detains another for the purpose of delivering him to the proper authorities?
a) unlawful arrest
b) illegal detention
c) arbitrary detention
d) grave coercion
21) A killed M. After the killing, A went to the Barangay Chairman of the place of incident to seek protection against the retaliation of M’s relatives.
May voluntary surrender be appreciated as a mitigating circumstance in favor of A?
a) Yes. A surrendered to the Barangay Chairman who is a person in authority.
b) Yes. The surrender of A would save the authorities the trouble and expense for his arrest.
c) No. A did not unconditionally submit himself to the authorities in. order to acknowledge his participation in the killing or to save the authorities the trouble and expenses necessary for his search and capture.
d) No. The surrender to the Barangay Chairman is not a surrender to the proper authorities.
22) Who among the following is liable for estafa?
a) The seller of a laptop computer who failed to inform the buyer that the laptop had a defect.
b) The person who ran away with a cell phone which was handed to him upon his pretense that he had to make an emergency call.
c) The person who assured he will pay interest on the amount but failed to do so as promised.
d) The son who induced his father to buy from him a land which the son is no longer the owner.
23) What is the nature of the circumstance which is involved in the imposition of the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence?
a) qualifying circumstance
b) aggravating circumstance
c) modifying circumstance
d) analogous circumstance
24) A, B and C, all seventeen (17) years of age, waited for nighttime to avoid detection and to facilitate the implementation of their plan to rob G. They entered the room of G through a window. Upon instruction of A, G opened her vault while 8 was poking a knife at her. Acting as lookout, C had already opened the main door of the house when the helper was awakened by the pleading of G to A and B to just take the money from the vault without harming her. When the helper shouted for help upon seeing G with A and B inside the room, 8 stabbed G and ran towards the door, leaving the house with C. A also left the house after taking the money of G from the vault. G was brought to the hospital where she died as a result of the wound inflicted by B.
Under the given facts, are A, B and C exempt from criminal liability? If not, what is the proper charge against them or any of them?
a) A, B and C, being under eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the offense, are exempt from criminal liability and should be merely subjected to intervention program for child in conflict with the law.
b) There being no indication of having acted with discernment, A, B and C are exempt from criminal liability, subject to appropriate programs in consultation with the person having custody over the child in conflict with the taw or the local social welfare and development officer.
c) Considering the given facts which manifest discernment, A, B and C are not exempt from criminal liability and should be charged with the complex crime of robbery with homicide, subject to automatic suspension of sentence upon finding of guilt.
d) Under the given facts, A, 8 and C are not exempt from criminal liability because they conspired to commit robbery for which they should be collectively charged as principals, and in addition, B should be separately charged with homicide for the death of G, subject to diversion programs for children over 15 and under 18 who acted with discernment.
25) The guard was entrusted with the conveyance or custody of a detention prisoner who escaped through his negligence. What is the criminal liability of the escaping prisoner?
a) The escaping prisoner does not incur criminal liability.
b) The escaping prisoner is liable for evasion through negligence.
c) The escaping prisoner is liable for conniving with or consenting to, evasion.
d) The escaping prisoner is liable for evasion of service of sentence.
26) What crime is committed when a person assumes the performance of duties and powers of a public office or employment without first being sworn in?
a) anticipation of duties of a public office
b) usurpation of authority
c) prohibited transaction
d) unlawful appointment
27) What crime is committed by a public officer who, before the acceptance of his resignation, shall abandon his office to the detriment of the public service in order to evade the discharge of the duties of preventing, prosecuting or punishing the crime of treason?
a) abandonment of office or position
b) qualified abandonment of office
c) misprision of treason
d) negligence in the prosecution of offense
28) The key element in a crime of parricide other than the fact of killing is the relationship of the offender to the victim. Which one of the following circumstances constitutes parricide?
a) Offender killing the illegitimate daughter of his legitimate son
b) Offender killing his illegitimate grandson
c) Offender killing his common-law wife
d) Offender killing his illegitimate mother
