Felonies Flashcards
What are the two components of felonies by dolo?
o 1. Act and omission punishable by law (physical act)
o 2. Mens rea (intent)
For felonies by dolo, one is not criminally liable if there is no criminal intent.
What about culpa?
Not intent, but negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill
May someone be held criminally liable for crimes of omission?
YES. The following must concur:
1. There is a positive duty provided by law
2. Accused acted voluntarily to not do a positive duty
3. Criminal intent in refusing to do it
o Examples: misprision of treason, prevaricacion (Art. 208 of RPC), fraud on treasury
What is mistake of fact?
An error that is not caused by the neglect of a legal duty on the part of the person committing the error but rather consists of an unconscious ignorance of a past or present material event or circumstance
What is abberatio ictus and what are its implications?
This is mistake in the victim of the blow. There is still criminal liability, which is generally increased (because it either becomes a complex crime or two separate crimes – against the intended and the real victim).
Can treachery apply to abberatio ictus?
Yes, because if the accused fired at his intended target but missed, the victims are helpless to defend themselves.
What is error in personae and its implications?
This is mistake in the identity. It may or may not lower criminal liability depending on the crime committed and if the intended crime is of equal or different gravity.
X intended to kill Y, but instead killed his father, Z by mistake. What is X Criminal Liability?
Instead of homicide, it became parricide. In this case, Art. 49 will govern: error in personae becomes mitigating (apply maximum period of homicide as penalty).
What is praeter intentionem and its implications?
The accused did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. This is a mitigating circumstance under Art. 13.
What is the rule on specific intent felonies?
In specific intent felonies, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt the specific intent. But sometimes, specific intent may be presumed.
Must motive be proved for dolo?
Not in general. Motive is not an essential element of crime. But there are instances where motive is a prerequisite to conviction of accused.
Political crimes –If the crime committed, for instance murder, is in pursuance of political motive in rebellion or coup d’etat, it is absorbed by the crime.
Death by exceptional circumstances – killed wife and paramour who were having sexual intercourse. Not criminally liable for homicide, if motive is to avenge dishonor. But if he killed the wife for some other motive, and not due to exceptional circumstances, then he is criminally liable.
Motive, however, is useful when there is doubt whether the accused committed the crime or as regards the identity of the accused
When is criminal intent not needed to commit a crime?
- Culpa
2. Crimes malum prohibitum
Is reckless imprudence under 365 a felony under Art. 3?
Yes. It is a quasi-offense.
Does mistake in the identity of the victim constitute reckless imprudence?
No. Mistake in identity is not culpa.
Ex. Policemen were trying to arrest an escapee, and they saw a man sleeping. They thought the man was the escapee. HELD: The felony was dolo, not culpa, because the killing was deliberate.
May there be a crime of frustrated homicide through reckless imprudence?
Frustrated homicide requires intent to kill. This is incompatible with recklessness, negligence, or imprudence.
