Removal Bar Qs Flashcards
What is the difference between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling? (2%)
The differences between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling are; 1) The offender in violation of domicile is
a public
officer acting under color of authority; in trespass to
dwelling, the offender is a private person or public
officer acting in a private capacity.
2)
Violation of domicile is committed in 3 different
ways: (1) by entering the dwelling of another against the will of the latter; (2) searching papers and other effects inside the dwelling without the previous consent of the owner; or (3) refusing to leave the premises which he entered surreptitiously, after being required to leave the premises.
3)
Trespass to dwelling is committed only in one
way; that is, by entering the dwelling of another against the express or implied will of the latter.
gh Seas & Qualified Piracy (2006) While the S.S. Nagoya Maru was negotiating the sea route from Hongkong towards Manila, and while still 300 miles from Aparri, Cagayan, its engines malfunctioned. The Captain ordered the ship to stop for emergency repairs lasting for almost 15 hours. Due to exhaustion, the officers and crew fell asleep. While the ship was anchored, a motorboat manned by renegade Ybanags from Claveria, Cagayan, passed by and took advantage of the situation.
They cut the ship’s engines and took away several heavy crates of electrical equipment and loaded them in their motorboat. Then they left hurriedly towards Aparri. At daybreak, the crew found that a robbery took place. They radioed the Aparri Port Authorities resulting in the apprehension of the culprits.what crime is committed?
Piracy in the high seas was committed by the renegade Ybanags. The culprits, who are neither members of the complement nor passengers of the ship, seized part of the equipment of the vessel while it was three hundred miles away from Aparri, Cagayan (Art. 122, Revised Penal Code).
On May 5, 1992, at about 6:00 a.m., while Governor Alegre of Laguna was on board his car traveling along the National Highway of Laguna, Joselito and Vicente shot him on the head resulting in his instant death. At that time, Joselito and Vicente were members of the liquidation squad of the New People’s Army and they killed the governor upon orders of their senior officer. Commander Tiago. According to Joselito and Vicente, they were ordered to kill Governor Alegre because of his corrupt practices. If you were the prosecutor, what crime will you charge Joselito and Vicente? [5%J
.
If I were the prosecutor, I would charge Joselito and Vicente for the crime of murder as the purpose of the killing was because of his “corrupt practices “, which does not appear to be politically motivated. There is no indication as to how the killing would promote or further the objective of the New Peoples Army. The killing is murder because it was committed with treachery.
Taking into account the nature and elements of the felonies of coup d’ etat and rape, may one be criminally liable for frustrated coup d’ etat or frustrated rape?
Explain. (2%)
No, one cannot be criminally liable for frustrated coup d’ etat or frustrated rape because in coup d’ etat the mere
attack directed against the duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or installation, communication networks, public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power would consummate the crime. The objective may not be to overthrow the government but only to destabilize or paralyze the government through the seizure of facilities and utilities essential to the continued possession and exercise of governmental powers.
On the other hand, in the crime of rape there is no frustrated rape it is either attempted or consummated rape. If the accused who placed himself on top of a woman, raising her skirt and unbuttoning his pants, the endeavor to have sex with her very apparent, is guilty of Attempted rape. On the other hand, entry on the labia or lips of the female organ by the penis, even without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina, consummates the crime
of rape. More so, it has long abandoned its ―stray‖ decision
in People vs. Erina 50 Phil 998 where the accused was found guilty of Frustrated rape.
If a group of persons belonging to the armed forces makes a swift attack, accompanied by violence, intimidation and threat against a vital military installation for the purpose of seizing power and taking over such installation, what crime or crimes are they guilty of? (3%)
The perpetrators, being persons belonging to the Armed Forces, would be guilty of the crime of coup d’etat, under Article 134-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, because their attack was against vital military installations which are essential to the continued possession and exercise of governmental powers, and their purpose is to seize power by taking over such installations.
- How is the crime of coup d’etat committed? [3%] 2. Supposing a public school teacher participated in a coup d’etat using an unlicensed firearm. What crime or crimes did he commit? [2%]
- The crime of coup d’etat is committed by a swift attack, accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth against the duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, military camps and installations, communication networks, public utilities and facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power, carried out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the Philippines by persons belonging to the military or police or holding public office, with or without civilian support or participation, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power. (Art 134-A, RPC).
- The public school teacher committed only coup d’etat for his participation therein. His use of an unlicensed firearm is absorbed in the coup d’etat under the new firearms law (Rep. Act No. 8294).
VC, JG. GG and JG conspired to overthrow the Philippine Government. VG was recognized as the titular head of the conspiracy. Several meetings were held and the plan was finalized. JJ, bothered by his conscience, confessed to Father Abraham that he, VG, JG and GG have conspired to overthrow the government. Father Abraham did not report this information to the proper authorities. Did Father Abraham commit a crime? If so, what crime was committed? What is his criminal liability?
No, Father Abraham did not commit a crime because the conspiracy involved is one to commit rebellion, not a conspiracy to commit treason which makes a person criminally liable under Art 116, RFC. And even assuming that it will fall as misprision of treason, Father Abraham is exempted from criminal liability under Art. 12, par. 7, as his failure to report can be considered as due to “insuperable cause”, as this involves the sanctity and inviolability of a confession.
Conspiracy to commit rebellion results in criminal liability to the co-conspirators, but not to a person who learned of such and did not report to the proper authorities (US vs. Vergara, 3 Phil. 432; People vs. Atienza. 56 Phil. 353).
A, a teacher at Mapa High School, having gotten mad at X, one of his pupils, because of the latter’s throwing paper clips at his classmates, twisted his right ear. X went out of the classroom crying and proceeded home located at the back of the school. He reported to his parents Y and Z what A had done to him. Y and Z immediately proceeded to the school building and because they were running and talking in loud voices, they were seen by the barangay chairman, B, who followed them as he suspected that an untoward incident might happen. Upon seeing A inside the classroom, X pointed him out to his father, Y, who administered a fist blow on A, causing him to fall down. When Y was about to kick A, B rushed towards Y and pinned both of the latter’s arms. Seeing his father being held by B, X went near and punched B on the face, which caused him to lose his grip on Y. Throughout this incident, Z shouted words of encouragement at Y, her husband, and also threatened to slap A. Some security guards of the school arrived, intervened and surrounded X, Y and Z so that they could be investigated in the principal’s office. Before leaving, Z passed near A and threw a small flower pot at him but it was deflected by B. a) What, if any, are the respective criminal liability of X Y and Z? (6%) b) Would your answer be the same if B were a barangay tanod only? (4%)
Qualified Piracy under Article 123 of the Revised Penal Code was committed because all the elements
thereof were present, to wit:
(1) the vessel Royal S.S. Maru is on the high seas, or 300 nm away from Appari, Cagayan; (2) that the
offenders are not members of its complement or passengers thereof; and (3) that the offenders seized
equipment from the vessel, i.e., the crates.
Moreover, the crime was qualified because: (1) the offenders seized the vessel by boarding; and (2) the
crime of piracy was accompanied by murder and physical injuries.
The Royal S.S. Maru, a vessel registered in Panama, was 300 nautical miles from Aparri, Cagayan
when its engines malfunctioned. The Captain ordered his men to drop anchor and repair the ship.
While the officers and crew were asleep, armed men boarded the vessel and took away several
crates containing valuable items and loaded them in their own motorboat. Before the band left,
they planted an explosive which they detonated from a safe distance. The explosion damaged the
hull of the ship, killed ten (10) crewmen, and injured fifteen (15) others.
What crime or crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. (2016 Bar Question)
Art. 123. Qualified piracy. — The penalty of reclusion temporal to death shall be imposed upon those who commit any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article, under any of the following circumstances:
- Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same;
- Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or
- Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape.
What is the crime committed by a public officer who discloses to the representative of a foreign
nation the contents of the articles, data or information of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine archipelago which he has in his possession by reason of the public
office he holds? (2012 Bar Question)
Espionage is committed by public officer, who is in possession, by reason of the public office he holds, of the articles, data, or information of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine Archipelago, discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation (Article 117 of the Revised
Penal Code).
Can the crime of treason be committed only by a Filipino citizen?
No. The offender in the crime of treason is either a Filipino citizen or an alien residing in the Philippines because while permanent allegiance is owed by the alien to his own country, he owes a temporary allegiance to the Philippines where he resides.
- Because peace negotiations on the Spratl s situation had failed, the People s Republic of China
declared war against the Philippines. Myra, a Filipina who lives with her Italian expatriate
boyfriend, discovered e-mail correspondence between him and a certain General Tung Kat Su of
China.
On March 12, 2010, Myra discovered that on even date, her boyfriend sent an e- mail to General
Tung Kat Su, in which he agreed to provide vital information on the military defense of the
Philippines to the Chinese government in exchange for P1 million and his safe return to Italy.
Two weeks later, Myra decided to report the matter to the proper authorities.
Did Myra commit a crime? Explain. (2010 Bar Question
Yes, Myra committed the crime of Misprision of Treason because she failed to report as soon as possible
to the governor or provincial fiscal or to the mayor or fiscal of the City where she resides, the conspiracy
between her Italian boyfriend and the Chinese General to commit treason against the Philippine
Government.
Under Article 116 of the Revised Penal Code, every person who, owing allegiance to the Government,
without being a foreigner, and having knowledge of any conspiracy against it, conceals or does not disclose
and make known the same, as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides, commits misprision of treason.
The inter-island vessel M/V Viva Lines I, while cruising off Batanes, was forced to seek shelter at
the harbor of Kaoshiung, Taiwan because of a strong typhoon. While anchored in said harbor,
Max, Baldo and Bogart arrived in a speedboat, fired a bazooka at the bow of the vessel, boarded
it and divested the passengers of their money and jewelry. A passenger of M/V Viva Lines I,
Dodong took advantage of the confusion to settle an old grudge with another passenger, and killed
him. After their apprehension, all four were charged with qualified piracy before a Philippine court. Was the charge of qualified piracy against the three persons (Max, Baldo, and Bogart) who
boarded the inter-island vessel correct? Explain. (2008 Bar Question)
Yes, Max, Baldo and Bogart committed qualified piracy when, not being members or passengers of the
M/V Viva Lines I, attacked said vessel in Philippines aters, and sei ed the passengers personal
belongings. Moreover, the crime was qualified when Max, Baldo and Bogart boarded the vessel and fired
upon the ship, and divested the passengers of their money and jewelry (Art. 122, 123 of the Revised Penal
Code as amended by R.A. 7659 and P.D. 532). The crime was further qualified when they fired upon the
vessel and boarded it.
In his homily, Fr. Chris loudly denounced the many extrajudicial killings committed by the men in uniform. Policeman Stone, then attending the mass, was peeved by the denunciations of Fr. Chris. He immediately approached the priest during the homily, openly displayed his firearm tucked in his waist, and menacingly uttered at the priest: Father, may kalalagyan kayo kung hindi kayo tumigil. His brazenness terrified the priest, who cut short his homily then and there. The celebration of the mass was disrupted, and the congregation left the church in disgust over the actuations of Policeman Stone, a co-parishioner.
Policeman Stone was subsequently charged.
The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor is now about to resolve the case, and is mulling on what to charge Policeman Stone with.
May Policeman Stone be properly charged with either or both of the following crimes, or, if not, with what proper crime? (2017 Bar Question)
A. Interruption of religious worship as defined and punished under Art. 132 of the Revised Penal Code; and/or
B. Offending the religious feelings as defined and punished under Art. 133 of the Revised Penal Code.
‘
Policeman Stone may be charged with Interruption of religious worship because he is a public officer who disrupted the mass and caused the congregation to leave.
Under the Revised Penal Code, a public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion shall be liable for interruption of religious worship.
In this case, Policeman Stone, a public officer, disrupted the mass and caused the congregation to leave when he approached and threatened the priest during his homily.
B) Policeman Stone may not be charged with the crime of offending religious feelings because his act of
threatening the priest was not for the purpose of mocking or ridiculing the mass.
Jurisprudence provides that to be liable for offending religious feelings, the acts must be directed against religious practice or dogma or ritual to ridicule, mock or scoff at or attempt to damage an object of religious veneration [People v. Baes, (G.R. No. 46000 (1939)].
In this case, however, Policeman Stone threatened the priest because of the priest
A policeman who, without a judicial order, enters a private house over the owner s opposition is guilty of trespass to dwelling. (2009 Bar Question)
False, the policeman committed Violation of Domicile under Article 128 of the Revised Penal Code because it is committed by public officer who enters a dwelling against the will of the owner thereof without authority from a judicial order.
- After due hearing on a petition for a writ of amparo founded on the acts of enforced disappearance and extralegal killing of the son of the complainant allegedly done by the respondent military officers, the court
granted the petition. May the military officers be criminally charged in court with enforced disappearance and extralegal killing? Explain fully. (2008 Bar Question)
Yes, the respondent militar officers ma be criminall charged in court since enforced disappearance
may constitute Arbitrary Detention under Article 124 of the Revised Penal Code. On the other hand, extralegal killing may either be considered as Murder under Article 248 or Homicide under Article 249 of the same Code.
- Bernardo was enraged by his conviction for robbery by Judge Samsonite despite insufficient evidence. Pending his appeal, Bernardo escaped in order to get even with Judge Samsonite. Bernardo learned that the Judge regularly slept in his mistress house ever weekend. Thus, he
waited for the Judge to arrive on Saturday evening at the house of his mistress. It was about 8:00
p.m. when Bernardo entered the house of the mistress. He found the Judge and his mistress
having coffee in the kitchen and engaging in small talk. Without warning, Bernardo stabbed the
judge at least 10 times. The judge instantly died.
Prosecuted and tried, Bernardo was convicted of direct assault with murder. Rule with reasons
whether or not the conviction for direct assault with murder was justified, and whether or not the
trial court should appreciate the following aggravating circumstances against Bernardo, to wit: (1)
disregard of rank and age of the victim, who was 68 years old; (2) dwelling; (3) nighttime; (4)
cruelty; and (5) quasi-recidivism. (10%)
Bernardo was correctly convicted of direct assault with murder. Attacking Judge Samsonite by reason of
past performance of duty of convicting Bernardo based on his assessment of the evidence constitutes
qualified direct assault. He likewise committed the crime of murder when he committed the direct assault
with the circumstance of treachery. In a single act of attacking Judge Samsonite, he committed two crimes,
direct assault and murder. The two crimes may be complexed under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
(1) The circumstance of disregard of rank shall be absorbed because it is inherent element of the crime of
direct assault.
2) The circumstance of disregard of age is not present in this case because Bernardo s attack as not for the purpose of offending or insulting Judge Samsonite s age. (People v. Onabia, G.R. No. 128288, Apr. 20, 1999).
(3) The circumstance of dwelling maybe appreciated as an aggravating circumstance because Judge Samsonite was attacked in the house of his mistress, where he regularly slept. In the aggravating circumstance of dwelling, the victim need not be the owner of the dwelling place, but as the owner s invited guest, he, the stranger, is sheltered by the same roof and protected by the same intimacy it affords. He is entitled to respect even for that short moment. (People v. Balansi, G.R. No. 77284, 19 July 1990).
(4) The circumstance nighttime shall not be appreciated because the presence of treachery in the instant case absorbs this aggravating circumstance (People v. Pagador, G.R. No. 140006-10, April 20, 2001).
(5) The circumstance of cruelty may not also be appreciated because the infliction of several stab wounds by the perpetrator was not shown to be for the purpose of exacerbating the pain and suffering of the victim. The number of wounds inflicted on the victim is not proof of cruelty (Simangan v. People, G.R. No. 157984, July 8, 2004).
(6) Bernardo is also not a quasi-recidivist because he committed the crime while the judgement of conviction is on appeal. A quasi-recidivist is someone who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same (Article 160 of the Revised Penal Code).
- Dancio, a member of a drug syndicate, was a detention prisoner in the provincial jail of X Province.
Brusco, another member of the syndicate, regularly visited Dancio. Edri, the guard in charge who had been receiving gifts from Brusco everytime he visited Dancio, became friendly with him and became relaxed in the inspection of his belongings during his jail visits. In one of Brusco’s visits, he was able to smuggle in a pistol which Dancio used to disarm the guards and destroy the padlock of the main gate of the jail, enabling Dancio to escape. What crime(s) did Dancio, Brusco and Edri commit? Explain. (2015 Bar Question)
Dancio committed the crime of direct assault under Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code for disarming the guards with the use of pistol while they are engaged in the performance of their duties.
Edri committed infidelity in the custody of prisoner or evasion through negligence under Article 224 of the RPC. As the guard in charge, Edri as negligent in rela ing the inspection of the Brusco s belongings during jail visits allowing him to smuggle a pistol to Dencio, which he subsequently used to escape. Edri also committed indirect bribery under Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code by accepting gifts from Brusco, who was part of the syndicate to which Dancio belonged.
Brusco committed delivery of prisoner from jail under Article 156 of the Revised Penal Code, as well as bribery under Article 210 of the same Code. Helping a person confined in jail to escape constitutes this crime, and by providing Dencio with a pistol, he helped him escape.
Miss Reyes, a lady professor, caught Mariano, one of her students, cheating during an examination. Aside from calling Mariano’s attention, she confiscated his examination booklet and sent him out of the room, causing Mariano extreme embarrassment
In class the following day, Mariano approached Miss Reyes and without any warning, slapped her on the face. Mariano would have inflicted grave injuries on Miss Reyes had not Dencio, another student, intervened. Mariano then turned his ire on Dencio and punched him repeatedly, causing him injuries. What crime or crimes, if any, did Mariano commit? (2013 Bar Question)
M ariano is liable for two counts of direct assault for slapping Miss Reyes and repeatedly punching
Dencio. Miss Reyes is a person in authority expressly mentioned in Article 152 of the Revised Penal
Code, who was in the performance of her duties on the day of the commission of the assault. On the
other hand, Dencio, became an agent of a person in authority when he came to the aid of a person in
authority, Miss Reyes.
- Amelia, a famous actress, bought the penthouse unit of a posh condominium building in Taguig
City. Every night, Amelia would swim naked in the private, but open air, pool of her penthouse
unit. It must have been obvious to Amelia that she could be seen from nearby buildings. In fact, some residents occupying the higher floors of the nearby residential buildings did indeed entertain themselves and their friends by watching her swim in the nude from their windows.
What crime did Amelia commit? (2013 Bar Question)
- During a military uprising aimed at ousting the duly constituted authorities and taking over the government, General Tejero and his men forcibly took over the entire Rich Hotel which they used as their base. They used the rooms and other facilities of the hotel, ate all the available food they found, and detained some hotel guests.
What crime did General Tejero and his men commit?
.couplet
- 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, 8 and C, as well as those who were carrying unlicensed firearms and those who were merely present at the meeting? (2012 Bar Question)
- ## 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? (2012 Bar Question)
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? (2012 Bar
Evasion through negligence (Article 224 of the Revised Penal Code) and conniving with or consenting
to evasion (Article 223) are crimes committed by public officer in charged with the conveyance or custody
of the prisoner; either detention prisoner or prisoner b final judgment; hence, letters b and c are not
the answer. Evasion of service of sentence (Article 157) can only be committed by a prisoner by final
judgment, and not by mere detention prisoner (Curiano vs. CFI, G.R. No. L- 8104, April 15, 1955). Hence,
How is the crime of coup d’etat committed
When a person holding public employment undertakes a swift attack, accompanied by
strategy or stealth, directed against public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power for the purpose of diminishing state power.
- What is the proper charge against public officers or employees who, being in conspiracy with the rebels, failed to resist a rebellion by all means in their power, or shall continue to discharge the duties of their offices under the control of the rebels, or shall accept appointment to office under them? (2012 Bar Question)
The public officer or employee who performs any of the acts of disloyalty should not be in conspiracy with the rebels otherwise he will be guilty of rebellion
- What is the proper charge against a person who, without taking arms or being in open hostility
against the Government, shall incite others to deprive Congress of its legislative powers, by means
of speeches or writings? (2012 Bar Question)
- When is a disturbance of public order deemed to be tumultuous?
The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous if caused by more than three (3) persons who
are armed or provided with means of violence.
. What is the criminal liability, if any, of AAA who substitutes for a prisoner serving sentence for
homicide by taking his place in jail or penal establishment? (2012 Bar Question)
A. A person, who shall help the escape of person confined in jail or penal establishment by means of violence, intimidation, or bribery or other means, is liable for delivering prisoner from jail (Article 156 of the Revised Penal Code). A person who shall publicly use a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime commits using fictitious name (Article 178 of the Revised Penal Code).
- AAA was convicted of theft by a Manila Court and sentenced to a straight penalty of one (1) year
of prision correccional. After serving two (2) months of the sentence, he was granted conditional
pardon by the Chief Executive. One of the conditions of the pardon was for him not to be found guilty of any crime punishable by the laws of the country. He subsequently committed robbery in Pasay City. Can the Manila Court require AAA to serve the unexpired portion of the original
sentence? (2012 Bar Question)
No. AAA must first be found guilty of the subsequent offense before he can be prosecuted for
violation of conditional pardon.
To secure the release of his brother Willy, a detention prisoner, and his cousin Vincent, who is serving sentence for homicide, Chito asked the RTC Branch Clerk of Court to issue an Order which would allow the two prisoners to be brought out of jail. At first, the Clerk refused, but when Chito gave her P50,000.00, she consented.
She then prepared an Order requiring the appearance in court of Willy and Vincent, ostensibly as witnesses in a pending case. She forged the judge
Chito committed the crimes of (a) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art. 156, RPC) for working
out the escape of prisoners Willy and Vincent; (b) two counts of Corruption of Public Officials when he gave Php50,000.00 each to the Branch Clerk of Court and Edward; Art. 212, RPC); and (c) Falsification of Public Documents, as a principal by inducement (Art. 172[1], RPC, when he caused the falsification of the court Edwin, the jail guard who escorted the prisoner in getting out of jail, committed the crimes of
1. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, especially conniving with or consenting to Evasion
for leaving unguarded the prisoners escorted by him and provide them an opportunity to
escape (Art. 223, RPC);
2. Direct Bribery for receiving the P50,000.00 as consideration for leaving the prisoners
unguarded and allowing them the opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC).
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a crime there being no showing that he was aware of what his subordinates had done nor of any negligence on his part that would amount to infidelity in the custody of prisoners.
- Rigoberto gate-crashed the 71st birthday party of Judge Lorenzo. Armed with a piece of
wood commonly known as dos por dos, Rigoberto hit Judge Lorenzo on the back, causing the latter hospitali ation for 30 da s. Upon investigation, it appeared that Rigoberto had a grudge against Judge Lorenzo who, two years earlier, had cited Rigoberto in contempt and ordered his imprisonment for three (3) days.
A) Is Rigoberto guilty of Direct Assault? Why or why not? (2009 Bar Question)
B) Would your answer be the same if the reason for the attack was that when Judge Lorenzo
was still a practicing lawyer ten years ago, he prosecuted Rigoberto and succeeded in
sending him to jail for one year? Explain your answer. (2009 Bar Question)
A) No, Rigoberto is not guilty of Direct Assault because Judge Lorenzo has ceased to be a judge when
he was attacked. He has retired (71 years old) from his position as a person in authority when he was attacked. Hence, the attack on him cannot be regarded as against a person in authority anymore.
B) Yes, Rigorberto would still not be guilty of Direct Assault because a lawyer, who is deemed a person
in authority, must have been assaulted when engaged in actual performance of his professional duties or on the occasion of such performance. In this case, however, Judge Lorenzo, who was still a lawyer then, was celebrating his birthday at the time when Rigoberto assaulted him. He was neither in the performance of his duties nor attacked on occasion thereof.
- What are the different acts of inciting to sedition? (2007 Bar Question)
The different acts which constitute the crime of inciting to sedition are:
1. Inciting others through speeches, writings, banners and other media of representation to commit acts which constitutes sedition;
2. Uttering seditious words, speeches or circulating scurrilous libels against the Government of the
Philippines or any of its duly constituted authorities, which tend to disturb or obstruct the
performance of official functions, or which tend to incite others to cabal and meet for unlawful
purposes;
3. Inciting through the same media of representation rebellious conspiracies or riots;
4. Stirring people to go against lawful authorities, or disturb the peace and public order of the
community or of the Government; or
5. Knowingly concealing any of the aforestated evil practices (Art. 142, Revised Penal Code).
Erwin and Bea approached Mayor Abral and requested him to solemnize their marriage. Mayor Abral agreed. Erwin and Bea went to Mayor Abral’s office on the day of the ceremony, but Mayor Abral was not there. When Erwin and Bea inquired where Mayor Abral was, his chief of staff Donato informed them that the Mayor was campaigning for the coming elections. Donato told them that the Mayor authorized him to solemnize the marriage and that Mayor Abral would just
sign the documents when he arrived. Donato thereafter solemnized the marriage and later turned over the documents to Mayor Abral for his signature. In the marriage contract, it was stated that the marriage was solemnized by Mayor Abral. What crime(s) did Mayor Abral and Donato commit? Explain. (2015 Bar Question)
Donato committed Usurpation of Official Functions under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code because
he performed the act of solemnizing a marriage which pertained to the mayor, without being lawfully entitled to do so.
Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of public document by a public officer under Article 171. Making an untruthful statement by stating in a marriage contract, a public document, that the marriage was solemnized
him, is an act of falsification.
To aid in the rebuilding and revival of Tacloban City and the surrounding areas that had been
devastated by the strongest typhoon to hit the country in decades, the Government and other sectors , including NGOs, banded together in the effort. Among the NGOs was Bangon Waray, Inc. (BaWI), headed by Mr. Jose Ma. Gulang, its President and CEO. BaWI operated mainly as a social amelioration and charitable institution. For its activities in the typhoon-stricken parts of
Leyte Province, BaWI received funds from all sources, local and foreign, including substantial amounts from legislators, local government officials and the EU. After several months, complaints were heard about the very slow distribution of relief goods and needed social services by BaWI.
The COA reported the results of its audit to the effect that at least P10 Million worth of funds coming from public sources channeled to BaWI were not yet properly accounted for. The COA demanded reimbursement but BaWI did not respond.
Hence, Mr. Gulang was criminally charged in the Office of the Ombudsman with malversation of public funds as respectively defined and punished by Art. 217 and Art.218 of the Revised Penal Code. He was also charged with violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019 for causing undue injury to the Government.
In his defense, Mr. Gulang mainly contended that he could not be held liable under the various charges because he was not a public officer. (2017 Bar Question)
A) Who is a public officer?
B) Discuss whether the crimes charged against Mr. Gulang are proper. Explain your answer.
A) A public officer is any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular election or appointment by
competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government of the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or class.
B) Mr. Gulang, although a private person, may be charged with malversation and failure of accountable
officer to render accounts because he was in made in charge of public funds. Malversation and failure to render accounts shall also apply to private individuals who, in any capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds, revenues or property.
Mr. Gulang may not be held liable for RA No. 3019 because it was not shown that he conspired with a public officer in committing the crime. As a general rule, a private individual can be held liable for violation of if he conspired with a public officer in committing this crime.
The baptism of A was solemnized by B, an ecclesiastical minister, in the absence of C, one of the godparents. Upon request of the mother of A, B caused the inclusion of the name of C in
the baptismal certificate of A as one of the godparents and allowed a proxy for C during the baptismal ceremony. What is the criminal liability, if any, of the ecclesiastical minister? (2012
Bar Question)
The ecclesiastical minister is not criminally liable because the insertion of the name of C in
the baptismal certificate will not affect the civil status of A.
To aid in the rebuilding and revival of Tacloban City and the surrounding areas that had been
devastated by the strongest typhoon to hit the country in decades, the Government and other
sectors , including NGOs, banded together in the effort. Among the NGOs was Bangon Waray,
Inc. (BaWI), headed by Mr. Jose Ma. Gulang, its President and CEO. BaWI operated mainly as a
social amelioration and charitable institution. For its activities in the typhoon-stricken parts of
Leyte Province, BaWI received funds from all sources, local and foreign, including substantial
amounts from legislators, local government officials and the EU. After several months, complaints
were heard about the very slow distribution of relief goods and needed social services by BaWI.
The COA reported the results of its audit to the effect that at least P10 Million worth of funds coming from public sources channeled to BaWI were not yet properly accounted for. The COA
demanded reimbursement but BaWI did not respond.
Hence, Mr. Gulang was criminally charged in the Office of the Ombudsman with malversation of
public funds as respectively defined and punished by Art. 217 and Art.218 of the Revised Penal
Code. He was also charged with violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019 for causing undue injury to
the Government.
In his defense, Mr. Gulang mainly contended that he could not be held liable under the various
charges because he was not a public officer. (2017 Bar Question)
A) Who is a public officer?
B) Discuss whether the crimes charged against Mr. Gulang are proper. Explain your answer.
A) A public officer is any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular election or appointment by
competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the Government of the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or class.
B) Mr. Gulang, although a private person, may be charged with malversation and failure of accountable
officer to render accounts because he was in made in charge of public funds. Malversation and failure to render accounts shall also apply to private individuals who, in any capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds, revenues or property.
Mr. Gulang may not be held liable for RA No. 3019 because it was not shown that he conspired with a public officer in committing the crime. As a general rule, a private individual can be held liable for violation of if he conspired with a public officer in committing this crime.
A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of the inhabitants of X Municipality. Thereafter, X Municipality operated a shelter assistance program whereby construction materials were provided to the calamity victims, and the beneficiaries provided the labor. The construction was partially done when the beneficiaries stopped helping with the construction for the reason that they needed
to earn income to provide food for their families. When informed of the situation, Mayor Maawain approved the withdrawal of ten boxes of food from X Municipality’s feeding program, which were given to the families of the beneficiaries of the shelter assistance program. The appropriations for the funds pertaining to the shelter assistance program and those for the feeding program were separate items on X Municipality’s annual budget. (2015 Bar Question)
A) What crime did Mayor Maawain commit? Explain. B) May Mayor Maawain invoke the defense of good faith and that he had no evil intent when he
approved the transfer of the boxes of food from the feeding program to the shelter assistance
program? Explain
A) Mayor Maawain committed the crime of Illegal use of public funds or property or Technical
Malversation under Art. 220 of the RPC, because as an accountable public officer, he applied public funds and property under his administration, which were supposedly for the feeding program, to some other public use, i.e., the beneficiaries of the shelter assistance program.
B) No. Since the offense of Technical Malversation is mala prohibita, good faith is not a defense. The law
punishes the mere act of diverting public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular purpose to another public purpose.
- Filthy, a very rich businessman, convinced Loko, a clerk of court, to issue an order of release for Takas, Filthy s cousin, who was in jail for a drug charge. After receiving P500,000.00, Loko forged the signature of the judge on the order of release and accompanied Filthy to the detention center.
At the jail, Loko gave the guard P10,000.00 to open the gate and let Takas out. What crime or crimes did Filthy, Loko, and the guard commit? (2014 Bar Question)
Filthy committed the following crimes:
(a) Delivery of prisoners from Jail, Article 156, RPC, because he assisted in the removal of Takas, a
detention prisoner, from jail.
(b) Corruption of Public Officials, Article 212, RPC, because he gave P500,000.00 to the clerk of
court, under circumstances in which said public officer would be liable of direct bribery.
(c) Falsification of Public Document, Article 172(1), RPC, as a principal by inducement because he
gave the clerk of court P500,000.00 to induce him to forge the signature of the judge in the order
of release.
Loko committed the following crimes:
(a) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC, because he accepted P500,000.00 in consideration of the
execution of an act which constitutes a crime, i.e., forging the signature of the judge in the order of release that would enable Takas to get out of jail, in connection with the performance of his duty as a clerk of court.
(b) Falsification of Public Document, Article 171, RPC, because he took advantage of his position as
a clerk of court in forging the signature of the judge in the order of release. (c) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail, Article 156, RPC, because he assisted in the removal of Takas from
jail by forging the signature of the judge in the in the falsified order of release.
The guard committed the following crimes:
(a) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC, because in consideration of P10,000.00, he agreed to open the
gate and let Takas out. (b) Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, Article 223, RPC, because as the custodian of Takas,
connived or consented to his escape by opening the gate.
- Frank borrowed P1,000,000 from his brother Eric. To pay the loan, Frank issued a post-dated check to be presented for payment a month after the transaction. Two days before maturity, Frank called Eric telling him he had insufficient funds and requested that the deposit of the check be deferred. Nevertheless, Eric deposited the check and it was dishonored. When Frank failed to pay despite demand, Eric filed a complaint against him for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (The Bouncing Checks Law).
Was the charge brought against Frank correct? (2013 Bar Question)
Yes, the charge of Violation of BP 22 is correct. Being malum prohibitum , it is committed by mere issuance of a worthless check, and the conditions relating to the issuance are irrelevant to the prosecution of the offender. Frank s request to defer the deposit of the check as it has insufficient funds will not militate against his prosecution for BP Blg. 22.
- Judge Talim, upon complaint and application of the realty corporation Batmanson, Inc., issued a writ of preliminary injunction against Darjeeling Ventures, Inc., a competitor of Batmanson, Inc., without notice and hearing anyone.
If you were counsel for Darjeeling Ventures, Inc., what criminal charge should you file against Judge Talim? (2013 Bar Question)
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? (2012 Bar Question)
Anticipation of public office
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? (2012 Bar Question)
A jailer inflicted injury on the prisoner because of his personal grudge against the latter. The injury caused illness of the prisoner for more than thirty (30) days. What is the proper charge against the jailer? (2012 Bar Question)
Maltreatment of prisoner and serious physical injuries
- What is the proper charge against a lawyer who reveals the secrets of his client learned by him in his professional capacity
Betrayal of trust
What crime is committed by a public officer who, having control of public funds or property by reason of the duties of his office and for which he is accountable, permits any other person through abandonment to take such public funds or property? (2012 Bar Question)
- In malversation of public funds, the offender s return of the amount malversed has the following effect.,
A public officer who immediately returns the bribe money handed over to him commits: (2011 Bar Question)
No crime
May a judge be charged and prosecuted for the felony of qualified bribery? How about a public
prosecutor? A police officer? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)
No, a judge may not be charged of this felony because his official duty as a public officer is not law
enforcement but the determination of cases already filed in court.
A public prosecutor may be prosecuted for qualified bribery should he refrain from prosecuting an offender
who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of any offer,
promise, gift or present.
A police officer who refrains from arresting such offender for the same consideration above stated, may
be prosecuted for this felony since he is a public officer entrusted with law enforcement.
What is the crime of qualified bribery? (2010 Bar Question)
Qualified robbery is a crime committed by a public officer who is entrusted with law enforcement who, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or offer, refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death (Art. 211-A, Revised Penal
Code).
Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and Treasurer, respectively, of San Rafael, Leyte, caused the disbursement of public funds allocated for their local development programs for 2008.
Records show that the amount of P2-million was purportedly used as financial assistance for a rice production livelihood project. Upon investigation however, it was found that Roger and Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers and supporting documents in order to make it appear that qualified recipients who, in fact, are non-existent individuals, received the money.
Roger and Jessie are charged with malversation through falsification and violation of Section 3
(e) of R.A. 3019 for causing undue injury to the government. Discuss the propriety of the charges filed against Roger and Jessie. Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
The charge of complex crime of malversation through falsification is incorrect because the act of
falsification was not a necessary means to malverse the money. The falsifications were committed to cover up or hide the malversation and therefore, should be separately treated from malversation.
Moreover, they should be charged of violation of section 3(e) of RA 3019 for the breach of public trust and undue injury cause to the Government.
Eman, a vagrant, found a bag containing identification cards and a diamond ring along Roxas Blvd. Knowing that it was not his, he went to a nearest police station to seek help in finding the owner of the bag. At the precinct PO1 Melvin attended to him. In the investigation Eman proposed to PO1 Melvin, “in case you don’t find the owner let’s just pawn straight to the pawnshop and pawned the ring for P50,000.00 Eman never saw PO1 Melvin again.
What is the criminal liability of PO1 Melvin, if any? Explain. (2008 Bar Question)
PO1 Melvin committed the crime of theft when he took the bag of another, evidently with intent to gain but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things. Although he is not the one who found the property, he is considered as finder in law since the property was surrendered to him by the
actual finder (People v. Avila, G.R. No. L-19786, 31 March 1923).
N.B.: There is no malversation of public funds property in this case because PO1 is not an accountable officer for public funds or property whose duties permit or require the possession or custody of government funds or property, and who shall be accountable therefor and for the safekeeping thereof
in conformity with law (Arriola v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165711, 30 June 2006).
Eliseo, the deputy sheriff, conducted the execution sale of the property of Andres to satisfy
the judgment against him in favor of ABC Corporation, a government-owned or controlled
corporation with an original charter. However, the representative of the corporation failed to
attend the auction sale. Gonzalo, the winning bidder, purchased property for P100,000 which he
paid to Eliseo. Instead of remitting the amount to the Clerk of Court as ex-officio Provincial
Sheriff, Eliseo lent the amount to Myrna, his officemate, who promised to repay the amount
within two months, with interest thereon. However, Myrna reneged on her promise. Despite demands of ABC Corporation, Eliseo failed to remit the said amount.
A) State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if any, committed by Eliseo. (2008 Bar Question)
B) Would your answer to the first question be the same if ABC Corporation were a private
corporation? Explain. (2008 Bar Question)
A) Eliseo committed malversation for allowing Myrna to misappropriate the money for which he, as
Sheriff, is accountable for (Art. 217, RPC). In this case, the act of Eliseo of lending the amount to his officemate is tantamount to permitting any other person to take the public funds, considering that the P100,000 involved is a public funds, it should be turned-over to the Office of the Clerk of Court.
B) The answer would be the same since even if ABC is a private corporation, Eliseo is still accountable
for it, and the same should be delivered to the Court.
Upon opening a letter containing 17 money orders, the mail carrier forged the signatures of
the payees on the money orders and encashed them. What crime or crimes did the mail carrier
commit? Explain briefly. (2008 Bar Question)
The mail carrier may be guilty of the following crimes:
(a) malversation and falsification ( People. v. Villanueva); (b) infidelity in the custody of documents (US v. Gorospe); (c) qualified theft since the property stolen is a mail matter (Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan); (d) forgery under Art. 169 (2) RPC because there was a material alteration on a genuine document (US
v. Solito, 36 Phil 785); and (e) falsification under Art. 171 (1), (2) RPC because he counterfeited signatures to make it appear that
the payees signed the money order and received paymen
Manolo revealed to his friend Domeng his desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to
Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver. Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila with
Domeng’s revolver. As his gun was used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor Tan to help him
escape. The mayor gave Domeng P5,000.00 and told him to proceed to Mindanao to hide.
Domeng went to Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as an accessory to Cece’s murder.
Can he be held liable for the charge? Explain. (2007 Bar Question)
No, the mayor may not be charged as an accessory because he merely helped Domeng, an accomplice, to escape. Par. 3 of Art. 19, of the Revised Penal Code speaks of harboring or assisting in the escape of a
principal, not an accomplice.
Sixteen year old Aliswan prodded Ametyst, his girlfriend, to remove her clothing while they
were secretly together in her bedroom late one evening. Failing to get a positive response from
her, he forcibly undressed her. Apprehensive about rousing the attention of the household who
did not know of his presence inside her room, she resisted him with minimal strength, but she was
really sobbing in a muffled manner. He then undressed himself while blocking the door. Yet, the
image of a hapless and sobbing Amethyst soon brought him to his senses, and impelled him to
leave her room naked. He did not notice in his hurry that Amante, the father of Amethyst, who
was then sitting alone on a sofa in the sala, saw him leave his daughter s room naked.
Outside the house, the now-clothed Aliswan spotted Allesso, Ameth st s former suitor. Knowing
how Allesso had aggressively pursued Amethyst, Aliswan fatally stabbed Allesso. Aliswan
immediately went into hiding afterwards.
Upon learning from Amethyst about what Aliswan had done to her, an enraged Amante wanted to teach Aliswan a lesson he would never forget. Amante set out the next day to look for Aliswan in , his school. There, Amante found a young man who looked very much like Aliswan. Amante immediately rushed and knocked the young man unconscious on the pavement, and then draped
his body with a prepared tarpaulin reading RAPIST AKO HUWAG TULARAN. Everyone else in
the school was shocked upon witnessing what had just transpired, unable to believe that the timid
and quiet Alisto, Aliswan s identical twin brother, had committed rape. (2017 Bar Question)
A criminal complaint for attempted rape with homicide was brought against Aliswan in the
Prosecutor s Office. However, after preliminar investigation, the Investigating Prosecutor
recommended the filing of two separate informations one for attempted rape and the other
for homicide. Do you agree with the recommendation? Explain your answer.
B) Before the trial court, Aliswan moved that the cases should be dismissed because he was
entitled to the exempting circumstance of minority. Is his motion correct? Explain your
answer.
C) After receiving medical attendance for 10 days, Alisto consulted you about filing the proper
criminal complaint against Amante. What crimes, if any, will you charge Amante with?
Explain your answer.
D) Answering the criminal complaint filed by Alisto, Amante contended that he had incurred no
criminal liability for lack of criminal intent on his part, his intended victim being Aliswan, not
Alisto. What is this defense of Amante, and explain if the same will prosper?
D) The defense raised by Amante is error in personae. This defense is not proper because of Article 4 of
the Revised Penal Code, which provides that a person committing a felony is liable criminally although the wrongful act done be different from unlawful intent. Thus, under this provision, Amante is liable for the wrongful act done, and that is child abuse against Alisto, although it differs from the wrongful act intended, and that is abusing Aliswan
If the slightest penetration of the female genitalia consummates Rape by Carnal Knowledge, how does the accused commit Attempted Rape by Carnal Knowledge? (2017 Bar Question)
To be held liable for attempted rape by carnal knowledge the acts must be committed with clear intention
to have sexual intercourse, but the penis of the accused must not touch the labia of the pudendum of the
victim. Intent to have sexual intercourse is present if is shown that the erectile penis of the accused is in the position to penetrate or the accused actually commenced to force his penis into the victim’s sexual organ.
Why is there no crime of frustrated serious physical injuries? (2017 Bar Question)
The crime of Serious Physical Injuries is a formal crime consummated by a single act. Once the injuries are inflicted, the offense is consummated.
Jojo and Felipa are husband and wife. Believing that his work as a lawyer is sufficient to
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) No, Article. 247 of the Revised Penal Code is not applicable because the offender must catch his or
her spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person.
Se ual intercourse presupposes the penetration of the man s se ual organ into that of a oman s. In this case, the paramour was of the same gender as the erring spouse. As such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not applicable.
B) No. Under Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, adultery is committed by any married woman who
shall have se ual intercourse ith a man not her husband. Thus, Felipa, in having homose ual intercourse ith Alma, a woman , is not committing adulter .
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lina is liable for murder committed by killing the child qualified by the circumstance of treachery. She took
advantage of the child s tender age. Killing a child of tender age is held to be attended b treachery.
Fely is not liable for any crime. Fely did not participate in the actual killing of the child, and it was not
shown that there is conspiracy nor community of design to commit murder since her criminal intention
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 69
provide for the needs of their family, Jojo convinced Felipa to be a stay- at-home mom and care for their children. One day, Jojo arrived home earlier than usual and caught Felipa in the act of having sexual intercourse with their female nanny, Alma, in their matrimonial bed. In a fit of rage, Jojo retrieved his revolver from inside the bedroom cabinet and shot Alma, immediately killing her. (2016 Bar Question)
A) Is Art. 247 (death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances) of the Revised Penal
Code applicable in this case given that the paramour was of the same gender as the erring spouse? B) Is Felipa liable for adultery for having sexual relations with Alma?
A) No, Article. 247 of the Revised Penal Code is not applicable because the offender must catch her spouse in the act of having sexual intercourse with another person. Sexual intercourse presupposes the penetration of the man s se ual organ into that of a oman s. In this case, the paramour was of the same gender as the erring spouse. As such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse to speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not applicable.
B) No. Under Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, adultery is committed by any married woman who
shall have se ual intercourse ith a man not her husband. Thus, Felipa, in having homose ual intercourse ith Alma, a woman , is not committing adulter .
Lina worked as a housemaid and yaya of the one-week old son of the spouses John and Joana. When
Lina learned that her 70-year old mother was seriously ill, she asked John for a cash advance of
P20,000.00, but the latter refused. In anger, Lina gagged the mouth of the child with stockings, placed
him in a box, sealed it with masking tape, and placed the box in the attic. Lina then left the house and
asked her friend Fely to demand a P20,000.00 ransom for the release of the spouses’ child to be paid
within twenty-four hours. The spouses did not pay the ransom. After a couple of days, John discovered
the box in the attic with his child already dead. According to the autopsy report, the child died of
asphyxiation barely minutes after the box was sealed.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Lina and Fely commit? Explain. (2016 Bar Question)
Lina is liable for murder committed by killing the child qualified by the circumstance of treachery. She took
advantage of the child s tender age. Killing a child of tender age is held to be attended b treachery.
Fely is not liable for any crime. Fely did not participate in the actual killing of the child, and it was not
shown that there is conspiracy nor community of design to commit murder since her criminal intention
pertains to kidnapping for ransom. Moreover, her participation of demanding ransom for the release of the child is not connected to murder. Mens rea without actus reus is not a crime.
N.B. Lina is not guilty of kidnapping with murder because the child was not deprived of liberty. The child was essentially not deprived of liberty. The demand for ransom did not convert the offense into kidnapping. The demand for ransom is only a part of the diabolic scheme of the defendant to murder the child, to conceal his body and then demand money before the discovery of the cadaver.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Tiburcio guilty of frustrated homicide and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of four years and one day of prision correccional as minimum, to eight years of prision mayor as maximum, and ordered him to pay actual damages in the amount of P25,000.00. Tiburcio appealed to the Court of Appeals which sustained his conviction as well as the penalty imposed by the court a quo. After sixty days, the Court of Appeals issued an Entry of Judgment and remanded the records of the case to the RTC. Three days thereafter, Tiburcio died of heart attack. Atty. Abdul, Tiburcio’s counsel, filed before the RTC a Manifestation with Motion to Dismiss, informing the court that Tiburcio died already, and claiming that his criminal liability had been extinguished by his demise. (2015 Bar Question)
A) Should the RTC grant the Motion to Dismiss the case? Explain.
B) Assuming that Tiburcio’s death occurred before the Court of Appeals rendered its decision, will you give a different answer
“A) The RTC may not grant the motion to dismiss because the Court of Appeals already issued an Entry
of Judgment and the decision has become final and executory. However, the pecuniary penalty, such as the civil liability arising from the crime consisting of actual damages of P25,000, survives the death of Tiburcio.
B) Yes. The RTC decision must be set aside and the case against Tiburcio must consequently be dismissed.
The demise of Tiburcio which occurred before the Court of Appeals rendered its decision causes his criminal liability, as well as his civil liability ex delicto, to be totally extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused, the civil action is instituted therein for recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal case.
- Procopio, a call center agent assigned at a graveyard shift, went home earlier than usual. He
proceeded immediately to their bedroom to change his clothes. To his surprise, he found his wife
Bionci in bed making love to another woman Magna. Enraged, Procopio grabbed a knife nearby
and stabbed Bionci, who died. (2015 Bar Question)
A) What crime did Procopio commit, and what circumstance attended the case? Explain.
B) Assuming that Procopio and Bionci were common-law spouses, will your answer be the same?
Explain.
:
Procopio commited parricide for killing his wife. This case does not fall under death by exceptional
circumstance under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code because Bionci was caught having homose ual intercourse, hich is not se ual intercourse under the la .
The crime was attended by the circumstance of passion arising from a lawful sentiment as a result of
having caught his wife in the act of infidelity with another woman ( People v. Belarmino, G.R. No. L-4429,
April 18, 1952, En Banc).
B) The crime committed is Homicide if Procopio and Bionci were common law spouses. Parricide
contemplates killing by a spouse who is legally married to the victim.
After a heated argument over his philandering, Higino punched on the head his wife Aika, who
was six and a half months pregnant. Because of the impact, Aika lost her balance, fell on the floor
with her head hitting a hard object. Aika died and the child was expelled prematurely. After thirty-
six hours, the child died. (2015 Bar Question)
A) What crime(s) did Higino commit? Explain.
B) Assuming that when the incident occurred, Aika was only six months pregnant, and when she
died, the fetus inside her womb also died, will your answer be different? Explain.
A) Higino committed two counts of parricide for the death of his wife and his child. Article 246 of Revised
Penal Code is committed because of the qualifying circumstance of relationship. This is a complex crime because the single act of punching the victim constitutes two grave felonies (Article 48).
B) Yes. If the child died inside the womb of Aika, who was only six months, the crime committed is
complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion. Killing the unborn child as a result of the violence employed against the mother without intent to abort is unintentional abortion. Because the same violence that killed the mother also caused unintentional abortion, the crime committed is a complex crime.
- Charlie was charged for the qualified rape of AAA. The Information alleged that AAA was 14 years old at the time the crime was committed and that Charlie was AAA’s stepfather. The presentation of AAA’s birth certificate during the trial duly established the following: ( 1) that AAA was indeed 14 years old at the time of the rape; and (2) that AAA’s mother is BBB and her father was the late CCC. BBB and Charlie only became live-in partners after CCC’s death. The RTC found Charlie guilty of qualified rape. On appeal, the Court of Appeals convicted Charlie of simple rape. Charlie appealed before the Supreme Court. How will you rule and why? (2015 Bar Question)
The Court of Appeals ruling is wrong because the crime of qualified rape was proven. Minority and step- relationship as qualifying circumstances are alleged in the information and proven by the evidence.
- Macho married Ganda, a transgender. Macho was not then aware that Ganda was a transgender.
On their first night, after their marriage, Macho discovered that Ganda was a transgender. Macho confronted Ganda and a heated argument ensued. In the course of the heated argument, a fight took place wherein Ganda got hold of a knife to stab Macho. Macho ran away from the stabbing thrusts and got his gun which he pointed at Ganda just to frighten and stop Ganda from continuing with the attack. Macho had no intention at all to kill Ganda. Unfamiliar with guns, Macho accidentally pulled the trigger and hit Ganda that caused the latter s death.
What was the crime committed? (2014 Bar Question)
Macho did not commit any crime because he acted in self-defense [Art. 13 (1)].
Pretty was a campus beauty queen who, because of her looks and charms, attracted many suitors.
Having decided that she would become a nun, Pretty turned down all her suitors. Guapo, one of
her most persistent suitors, could not handle rejection and one night, decided to accost Pretty as
she walked home. Together with Pogi, Guapo forced Pretty into his car and drove her to an
abandoned warehouse where he and Pogi forced Pretty to dance for them. Later, the two took
turns in raping her. After satisfying their lusts, Guapo and Pogi dropped her off at her house. (2014
Bar Question)
A) What crime or crimes did Guapo and Pogi commit?
B) Pretty, after the ordeal, decided to take her own life by hanging herself one hour after the rape.
Would Guapo and Pogi be liable for Pretty s death? E plain.
A) Guapo and Pogi committed the complex crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape, and another count
of rape. They abducted Pretty against her will with lewd design, and thereafter raped her. Forcible abduction was a necessary means to commit the crime of Rape. Since there is conspiracy, Guapo and Pogi are responsible not only for the rape each personally committed but also for the rape committed by his co- conspirator.
B) Guapo and Pogi would not be held liable for the death of Pretty. Suicide is an efficient intervening
cause that has broken the causal connection between the rapes and the death.
If Rod killed Irene, his illegitimate daughter, after taking her diamond earrings and forcing her to have sex with him, what crime/s should Rod be charged with? (2013 Bar Question)
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? (2012 Bar Question)
D. The pregnant woman cannot be held liable for abortion under Article 258 of the Revised Penal Code because intent to abort, which is an essential element of this crime, is lacking. Neither can she be held liable
for unintentional abortion under Article 257, because the element of violence is wanting.
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? (2012 Bar Question)
What crime is committed by a person who kills a three-day old baby? (2012 Bar Question)
Murder
What crime is committed by a person who kills his legitimate brother on the occasion of a
public calamity? (2012 Bar Question)
Killing his legitimate brother is not parricide since he is just a collateral relative of the accused. However, killing a person on occasion of public calamity is qualifies the killing to murder.
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? (2012 Bar Question) 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.
GESTED ANSWER:
D. Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; (3) the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse of the accused (People v. Tibon, GR No. 188320, June 29, 2010). Killing his granddaughter, grandson or wife shall not be considered as parricide since the relationship is not legitimate. In parricide, the legitimacy of the relationship is an essential element thereof if the victim is the wife or the second-degree direct relative of the offender. Hence, A , B or C is not the answer. On the other hand, killing his illegitimate mother is parricide. In parricide, the legitimacy of the relationship is not an essential element thereof if the victim is the first-degree direct relative of the offender.
What crime is committed when a mother kills the three-day old child of her husband with
their daughter? (2012 Bar Question)
C. The crime committed is not infanticide since the victim killed is not less than three days of age. As the child of her daughter, the baby is the illegitimate grandchild of the offender. Killing her illegitimate grandchild is not parricide. However, killing of a 3-day-old baby constitutes murder qualified by treachery.
When is a crime deemed to have been committed by a band? (2012 Bar Question)
There are three elements of band under Article 14 (6) of the Revised Penal Code, to wit: (1) there must
be at least four malefactors, (2) at least four of them are armed (People v. Solamillo, GR No. 123161, June
18, 2003, En Banc), and (3) at least four of them take part or acted together in the commission of crime. In People v. Lozano, September 29, 2003, GR Nos. 137370-71, the Supreme Court En Banc stated that the four armed persons contemplated in the circumstance of band must all be principals by direct participation who acted together in the execution of the acts constituting the crime.
With intent to kill, GGG burned the house where F and D were staying. F and D died as a consequence. What is the proper charge against GGG? (2012 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. If the main objective of the offender is to kill a particular person who may be in a building or edifice,
when fire is resorted to as the means to accomplish such goal the crime committed is murder only.
A entered the house of B. Once inside the house of B, A took and seized personal property by compulsion from B with the use of violence and force upon things, believing himself to be the owner of the personal property so seized. What is the criminal liability of A? (2012 Bar Question)
A is not criminally liable for robbery since the presumption of intent to gain, an element of this crime,
is rebutted because he took the personal property under a bona fide belief that he owns the property.
However, A is liable for grave coercion because he used violence in seizing the property by reason of his
mistaken belief that he owned it.
What crime is committed when a person ill-treats another by deed without causing any injury?
(2012 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Maltreatment is committed by an offender, who shall ill-treat another by deed without causing any
injury (Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code).
- Explain and illustrate the stages of execution of the crime of homicide, taking into account the nature
of the offense, the essential element of each of the stages of execution and the manner of committing such
international felony as distinguished from felony committed through reckless imprudence
Elements of the crime homicide as an intentional felony has three stages, attempted, frustrated and
consummated. In whatever stages homicide is committed, intent to kill must be established for being an
indispensable element thereof. However, if the victim died as a consequence of wound cause by an act
committed with malice, intent to kill in conclusively presumed and the crime committed is consummated
homicide. But if the victim did not die as a consequence of wounds cause by an act committed with
malice, intent to kill must be established beyond reasonable doubt. If intent to kill is proven, the crime
committed is frustrated or attempted homicide. If intent to kill is not proven, the crime committed is
physical injuries. Thus, lack of intent to kill is a defense in attempted or frustrated homicide.
Nature of the crime if the offender with intent to kill attempted to inflict or inflicted non-mortal wounds
upon the victim, he already directly commenced an overt act to commit homicide. Hence, the crime
committed is attempted homicide if he failed to inflict mortal wounds upon the victim by reason of
some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. If the offender with intent to kill
inflicted mortal wounds upon the victim, he already performed all acts of execution which would have
produced the homicide as a consequence. If death is not produced despite the mortal character of the
wounds due to causes independent to the will of the offender, the crime committed is frustrated
homicide. If death is produced, the crime committed is consummated homicide.
Intentional felony and culpable felony homicide regardless of stages must be committed with malice (general
intent) and intent to kill (specific intent). Even if there is no intent to kill and evil intent, the offender is
liable for culpable felony if the victim died or injured as a result of the recklessness of the former. If there
is no intent to kill, evil intent and recklessness on the part of the accused, he is not liable for his intentional
act, which cause the death of or injury upon the victim because of the exempting circumstance of accident.
A, B, and C agreed to rob a house of its cash. A and B entered the house while C remained
outside as lookout. After getting the cash, A and B decided to set the house on fire to destroy any
evidence of their presence. What crime or crimes did C commit? (2011 Bar Question)
- X killed B, mistakenly believing that she was his wife, upon surprising her having sex with another man in a motel room. What is the criminal liability of X? (2011 Bar Question)
Homicide
Removing, concealing or destroying documents to defraud another constitutes the crime of
estafa if committed by:
Private individuals
- On hearing a hospital ward patient on the next bed, shrieking in pain and begging to die, Mona shut off the oxygen that was sustaining the patient, resulting in his death. What crime if any did Mona commit? (2011 Bar Question)
- A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. While eating in a seaside restaurant, they were
attacked by X, Y and Z, members of a rival fraternity. A rumble ensued in which the abovenamed
members of the two fraternities assaulted each other in a confused and tumultuous manner
resulting in the death of A. As it cannot be ascertained who actually killed A, the members of the
two fraternities who took part in the rumble were charged for death caused in a tumultuous affray.
Will the charge prosper? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)
No, the charge of death caused in a tumultuous affray will not prosper because the persons involved in this
case composed groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
reciprocally.
The killer of A, a member of SFC Fraternity could not be any other but member of the rival fraternity.
Conspiracy is therefore present among the attackers form the rival fraternity and thus rules out the idea of
an affray. The liability of the attackers should be collective for the crime of homicide or murder as the case
may be.
Charlie hated his classmate, Brad, because the latter was assiduousl courting Lil , Charlie s
girlfriend. Charlie went to a veterinarian and asked for some poison on the pretext that it would be used to kill a very sick, old dog. Actually, Charlie intended to use the poison on Brad.
The veterinarian mistakenly gave Charlie a non-to ic powder which, when mi ed with Brad s food, did not kill Brad.
Would your answer be the same if Brad proved to be allergic to the powder, and after ingesting it with his food, fell ill and was hospitalized for ten (10) days? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
No, the answer would not be the same. Charlie would be criminally liable for less serious physical injuries
because his act of mi ing the po der ith Brad s food as done ith felonious intent and as the
pro imate cause of Brad s illness for 10 da s.
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the same boarding house, occupying different rooms.
One late evening, when ever one in the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered Loretta s room with
the use of a picklock. Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao ravished Loretta. After he had
satisfied his lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death and, before leaving the room, took her
jewelry.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Wenceslao commit? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
Wenceslao committed the following crimes:
(1) the special complex crime of rape with homicide because his act of having carnal knowledge of Loretta
against her will and with the use of force and violence constituted rape, and death of Loreta was by reason or on the occasion of the rape;
(2) theft because the taking of jewelry is a mere afterthought; and
(3) unlawful possession of picklocks and similar tools under Art. 304 of the Revised Penal Code, because
of his possession and use of the picklock ithout la ful cause.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 78
238. Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the same boarding house, occ
Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the same boarding house, occupying different rooms.
One late evening, when ever one in the house was asleep, Wenceslao entered Loretta s room with
the use of a picklock. Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death and, before leaving the room, took her jewelry.
Would your answer to [a] [above] be the same if, despite the serious stab wounds she sustained, Loretta survived? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
UGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer will be different. There will be four separate crimes of:
(1) rape;
(2) frustrated homicide or murder;
(3) theft; and
(4) unlawful possession and use of picklocks under Art. 304 of the Revised Penal Code.
The special complex crime of rape with homicide is constituted only when both of them are consummated.
Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but their parents had objected to their relationship because
they were first cousins. They forged a pact in writing to commit suicide. The agreement was to shoot each other in the head which they did. Joan died. Due to medical assistance, Francis survived. Is Francis criminally liable for the death of Joan? Explain. (2008 Bar Question)
Yes. Francis is criminally liable for assisting in the suicide of Joan, as evidenced by their written pact (Art. 253, RPC).
- Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in Malate, Manila, demanded the payment by Antonio, the
the use of explosive, etc. and alike incendiary devices which resulted in the death of any person. (b) Art. 23, R.A. 7659 organized/syndicated crime group. - Eddie brought his son Randy to a local faith healer known as “Mother Himala.” He was
diagnosed by the faith healer as being possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie thereupon authorized the
conduct of a “treatment” calculated to drive the spirit from the bo s bod . Unfortunatel , the
procedure conducted resulted in the bo s death.
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 79
owner of a motel in that area, of P10,000 a month as “protection money”. With the monthly payment, Roger assured, the syndicate would provide protection to Antonio, his business, and his employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger warned, the motel owner would either be killed or his establishment destroyed. Antonio refused to pay the protection money. Days later, at round 3:00 in the morning, Mauro, a member of the criminal syndicate, arrived at Antonio’s home and hurled a grenade into an open window of the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and their 3-year-old daughter were sleeping. All three of them were killed instantly when the grenade exploded.
State, with reason, the crime or crimes that had been committed as well as the aggravating circumstances, if any, attendant thereto. (2008 Bar Question)
Roger and Mauro conspired to commit the crime of murder qualified by treachery, with the use of means involving great waste and ruin. In this case, Mauro is liable as a principal by direct participation by using a grenade and hurled into an open indo of the victim s bedroom. Killing the victims while they were sleeping and in no position to defend themselves, is a treacherous act (People v. Aguilar, 88 Phil 693, 1951).
Eddie brought his son Randy to a local faith healer known as “Mother Himala.” He was
diagnosed by the faith healer as being possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie thereupon authorized the conduct of a “treatment” calculated to drive the spirit from the bo s bod . Unfortunatel , the procedure conducted resulted in the bo s death.
The faith healer and tree others who were part of the healing ritual were charged with murder and convicted by the lower court. If you are appellate court Justice, would you sustain the conviction upon appeal? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
No, the conviction of murder should not be sustained because there was no intent kill. The intent of the accused, on the contrary is to treat Randy of his illness. However, considering that proximate cause of Rand s death is the ritual, accused may be held criminally liable for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide.
During a concert of Gary V. and in order to prevent the crowd from rushing to the stage, Rafael
Padilla (a security guard) pointed his gun at the onrush of people. When the crowd still pushed forward, Rafael fired his gun into air to scare them off. However, the bullet hit one of the metal roof supports, ricocheted and then hit one of the stage crew members, causing injuries which resulted in the latter s confinement in a hospital for twelve days.
What crime/s did Rafael commit? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
Rafael is guilty of Simple Negligence Resulting in Less Serious Physical Injuries because the physical injuries, which required only twelve (12) days of medical attention resulting therefrom, shows a lack of precaution in a situation where the danger to the discharge of the firearm is not clearly manifest.
Moreover, since the discharge of the firearm was to ward off the unruly crowd, and not to cause alarms or was not directed to a particular person, it is neither Alarms and Scandal under Art. 155 nor Illegal Discharge of Firearms under Art. 254 of the Revised Penal Code.
- Angelino, a Filipino, is a transgender who underwent gender reassignment and had implants in
different parts of her body. She changed her name to Angelina and was a finalist in the Miss Gay
International. She came back to the Philippines and while she was walking outside her home, she was
abducted by Max and Razzy who took her to a house in the province. She was then placed in a room and
Razzy forced her to have sex with him at knife’s point. After the act, it dawned upon Razzy that Angelina
is actually a male. Incensed, Razzy called Max to help him beat Angelina. The beatings that Angelina
received eventually caused her death. What crime or crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. (2016 Bar
Question)
Razzy is liable for kidnapping with homicide. Since Angelino was killed in the course of the detention, the
crime constitutes kidnapping with homicide under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code.
The abduction of Angelino could not be forcible abduction since the victim must be a woman. Similarly,
there is no rape through sexual intercourse since Angelino remains to be male.
There is also no rape through sexual assault because Razzy neither inserted his penis into the anal orifice
or mouth of Angelino nor another instrument or object into anal orifice or genital orifice. The act
constitutes acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 which was committed by reason or occasion of
kidnapping. Thus, it will be integrated into one and indivisible felony of kidnapping with homicide (People
v. De Leon, GR No. 179943, June 26, 2009; People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 05, 2016; People v.
A, B, and C agreed to rob the house of Mr. D at 10 o clock in the evening, with C as the driver
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 81
of the tricycle which they would use in going to and leaving the house of Mr. D, and A and B as the ones who would enter the house to get the valuables of Mr. D. As planned, C parked the tricycle in a dark place, while A and B entered the house thru an open door. Once inside, A entered the master s bedroom and started getting all the valuables he could see, while B entered another room. While inside the room, B saw a male person and immediately B brought out his gun but he accidentally pulled its trigger. The bullet went through the window, hitting a neighbor that killed him. Neighbors were then awakened by the gunfire and policemen were alerted. Not long after, policemen arrived. A and B panicked and got hold of a young boy and shouted to the policemen who were already outside of the house that they would harm the boy if the policemen did not disperse. A and B demanded that they should be allowed to use a vehicle to bring them to a certain place and that would be the time that they would release the young boy. The policemen acceded. In the meantime, C was arrested by the policemen while he was about to flee, while A and B, after releasing the young boy, were arrested.
What crime/s did A, B, and C commit, and what modifying circumstances attended the commission of the crime/s? (2014 Bar Question)
A, B, and C, in conspiracy, committed the crime of robbery with homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code because the criminal design was to rob Mr. D, and was attended by a killing on the occasion of the robbery. Even if said death is accidental, the crime is still robbery with homicide because the killing took place on occasion of the robbery.
The aggravating circumstance of dwelling is present because the crime was committed inside the dwelling of the offended party who has not given the any provocation.
Jack and Jill have been married for seven years. One night, Jack came home drunk. Finding
no food on the table, Jack started hitting Jill only to apologize the following day.
A week later, the same episode occurred Jack came home drunk and started hitting Jill.
Fearing for her life, Jill left and stayed with her sister. To woo Jill back, Jack sent her floral
arrangements of spotted lilies and confectioneries. Two days later, Jill returned home and decided
to give Jack another chance. After several days, however, Jack again came home drunk. The
following day, he was found dead. Jill was charged with parricide but raised the defense of “Battered Woman Syndrome.” A) Define “Battered Woman Syndrome.” (2010 Bar Question)
Battered Woman S ndrome refers to a scientificall defined pattern of ps chological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse (Section 3(d), Republic Act No. 9262). B) What are the three phases of the “Battered Woman Syndrome”? (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Battered Woman S ndrome is characteri ed b the c cle of violence, hich has three (3) phases: (1) the tension-building phase; (2) the acute battering incident; and (3) the tranquil, loving, or non-violent phase.
The husband has for a long time physically and mentally tortured his wife. After one episode
of beating, the wife took the husband s gun and shot him dead. Under the circumstances, her act
constitutes: (2011 Bar Question)
- Dion and Talia were spouses. Dion always came home drunk since he lost his job a couple of months
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) No, a single act of battery or physical harm committed by Dion against Talia resulting to the physical
for killing her husband since she suffered physical and emotional distress arising from cumulative abuse or battery, Under Section 26 of RA 9262, victim survivors of Battered Woman Syndrome do not incur any criminal or civil liability despite the absence of the requisites of self-defense. - Ms. A had been married to Mr. B for 10 years. Since their marriage, Mr. B had been jobless
and a drunkard, preferring to sta with his barkadas until the wee hours of the morning. Ms. A
was the breadwinner and attended to the needs of their three (3) growing children. Many times,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 118
ago. Talia had gotten used to the verbal abuse from Dion. One night, in addition to the usual verbal abuse, Dion beat up Talia. The next morning, Dion saw the injury that he had inflicted upon Talia and promised her that he would stop drinking and never beat her again. However, Dion did not make good on his promise. Just after one week, he started drinking again. Talia once more endured the usual verbal abuse. Afraid that he might beat her up again, Talia stabbed Dion with a kitchen knife while he was passed out from imbibing too much alcohol. Talia was charged with the crime of parricide. (2015 Bar Question)
A) May Talia invoke the defense of Battered Woman Syndrome to free herself from criminal
liability? Explain.
B) Will your answer be the same, assuming that Talia killed Dion after being beaten up after a
second time? Explain
No, a single act of battery or physical harm committed by Dion against Talia resulting to the physical
for killing her husband since she suffered physical and emotional distress arising from cumulative abuse or battery, Under Section 26 of RA 9262, victim survivors of Battered Woman Syndrome do not incur any criminal or civil liability despite the absence of the requisites of self-defense.
353. Ms. A had been married to Mr. B for 10 years. Since their marriage, Mr. B had been jobless
and a drunkard, preferring to sta with his barkadas until the wee hours of the morning. Ms. A
was the breadwinner and attended to the needs of their three (3) growing children. Many times,
CRIMINAL LAW BAR QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
PAGE 118
and psychological or emotional distress on her part is not sufficient to avail of the benefit of the justifying circumstance of Battered Women S ndrome .
The defense of Battered Woman Syndrome can be invoked if the woman with marital relationship with the victim is subjected to cumulative abuse or battery involving the infliction of physical harm resulting to the physical and psychological or emotional distress. Cumulative means resulting from successive addition. In sum, there must be at least t o battering episodes bet een the accused and her intimate partner and such final episode produced in the battered person s mind an actual fear of an imminent harm from her batterer and an honest belief that she needed to use force in order to save her life (People v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004).
Olimpio caught a cold and was running a fever. His doctor prescribed paracetamol. Olimpio
went to a drug store with the prescription, and the pharmacist sold him three (3) tablets. Upon
arriving home, he took a tablet. One hour later, he had a seizure and died. The autopsy showed
that the tablet he had taken was not paracetamol but a pill to which he was allergic. The
pharmacist was charged with murder. Is the charge proper? If not, what should it be? Explain.
(2008 Bar Question)
The charge was improper. The pharmacist should be charged with criminal negligence, or reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide, because there was not intent to kill Olimpio. The accused inexcusably
lacked precaution in failing to dispense the proper medicine to the victim hich caused the latter s death
(Art. 365, RPC).
Culpa can either be a crime by itself or a mode of committing a crime. Culpa is a crime by
itself in
complex crime of reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries.
AB was driving a van along a highway. Because of her recklessness, the van hit a car which had
already entered the intersection. As a result, CD who was driving the car suffered physical
injuries, while damage to his car amounted to P8,500.00. What is the proper charge against AB?
(2012 Bar Question)
A. Reckless imprudence under Article 365 is a single quasi-offense by itself and not merely a means to
commit other crimes. Hence, conviction or acquittal of such quasi-offense bars subsequent prosecution
for the same quasi-offense, regardless of its various consequences. Thus, AB may be convicted of one
crime, either reckless imprudence resulting in slight physical injuries or reckless imprudence resulting in
damage to property (Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro, GR No. 172716, November 17, 2010).
After drinking a bottle of Jack Daniels, Jonjon drove his BMW sports car at high speed,
rammed into a group of crossing pedestrians, and hit a traffic light post. The incident caused the
death of one (1) pedestrian, serious injuries to three (3) others, and the destruction of the traffic
light post.
If you were the prosecutor, what would you charge Jonjon? (2013 Bar Question)
Reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, serious physical injuries and damage to property.
In the crime of libel, truth is an absolute defense. (2009 Bar Question)
False, Art. 361 of the RPC provides that proof of truth shall be admissible in libel cases only if the same
imputes a crime or is made against a public officer with respect to fact related to the discharge of their
official duties, and moreover must have been published with good motives and for justifiable ends. Hence,
Angelina maintains a website where visitors can give their comments on the posted pictures
of the goods she sells in her exclusive boutique. Bettina posted a comment that the red Birkin bag
shown in Angelina s website is fake and that Angelina is known to sell counterfeit items.
Angelina wants to file a case against Bettina. She seeks your advice. What advice will you give her?
(2010 Bar Question)
I will advise Angelina to file a criminal case against Bettina for libel. The crime of libel is committed,
whether the imputation of a defect, status or condition is real or imaginary, if it publicly tends to discredit,
dishonor or place in contempt or ridicule a particular person who is identified, the imputation is
presumed by law to be malicious and thus penalized as libel under Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code.
Sam wrote a letter to his friends stating that Judge Odon loves obscene magazines and keeps these in his desk. Charged with libel, can Sam present proof that Judge Odon indeed loves obscene magazines and keeps these in his desk? (2011 Bar Question)
No, since Sam does not impute a crime to Judge Odon.
X, a court employee, wrote the presiding judge a letter, imputing to Y, also a court
employee, the act of receiving an expensive gift from one of the parties in a pending case.
Because of this, Y accused X of libel. Does Y need to prove the element of malice in the case?
(2011 Bar Question)
Yes, malice is not presumed since X wrote the letter to the presiding judge who has a duty
to act on what it states.
The exchanges of highly offensive words between two quarrelling women in the presence of a crowd of people constitute: (2011 Bar Question)
two separate counts of light slander, one for each woman.
X, a tabloid columnist, wrote an article describing Y, a public official, as stupid, corrupt, and having amassed ill-gotten wealth. X relied on a source from Y’s own office who fed him the information. Did X commit libel? (2011 Bar Question)
Plaintiff X said in his civil complaint for damages that defendant Y, employing fraud,
convinced him to buy a defective vehicle. Y filed a criminal action for libel against X for
maliciously imputing fraud on him. Will the action prosper if it turns out that the civil complaint
for damages was baseless? (2011 Bar Question)
for damages was baseless? (2011 Bar Question)
A) No, since pleadings filed in court are absolutely privileged.
A police officer surreptitiously placed a marijuana stick in a student s pocket and then
arrested him for possession of marijuana cigarette. What crime can the police officer be charged
with? (2011 Bar Question)
Complex crime of incriminating an innocent person with unlawful arrest
A, B, C and D are members of the police department of a municipality. Conspiring with one
another, they arrested E without reasonable ground for the purpose of delivering him to the
proper authorities by imputing to E the crime of bribery. While E was being investigated by A,
B, C and D, one of them placed a marked five hundred peso bill, together with the money taken
from E, to make it appear that E, an employee of the Office of the Local Civil Registrar, agreed
to perform an act not constituting a crime in connection with the performance of E’s duties,
which was to expedite the issuance of a birth certificate. What is the crime committed by A, B,
C and D? (2012 Bar Question)
A. A, B, C, and D are guilty of incriminatory machination through unlawful arrest. They unlawfully arrested
the offended party because it was the only way that they could detain him and, in the process, commingle
- A is the president of the corporate publisher of the daily tabloid, Bulgar; B is the managing editor; and
C is the author/writer. In his column, Direct Hit, C wrote about X, the head examiner of the BIR-RDO
Manila as follows:
“Itong si X ay talagang BUWAYA kaya ang logo ng Lacoste T shirt niya ay napaka suwapang na
buwaya. Ang nickname niya ay si Atty. Buwaya. Ang PR niya ay 90% sa bayad ng taxpayer at ang para
sa RP ay 10% lang. Kaya ang baba ng collection ng RDO niya. Masyadong magnanakaw si X at dapat
tanggalin itong bundat na bundat na buwaya na ito at napakalaki na ng kurakot.”
A, Band C were charged with libel before the RTC of Manila. The three (3) defendants argued that the
article is within the ambit of qualified privileged communication; that there is no malice in law and in
fact; and, that defamatory comments on the acts of public officials which are related to the discharge of
their official duties do not constitute libel.
Was the crime of libel committed? If so, are A, B, and C all liable for the crime? Explain. (2016 Bar
Question)
Yes. The crime of libel was committed.
Fair comment on acts of public officers related to the discharge of their duties is a qualified privileged
communication, hence, the accused can still be held liable for libel if actual malice is shown. In fair
comment, actual malice can be established by showing that comment was made with knowledge that it was
false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not.
In the case at the bar, the report made by C, in describing a lawyer in the BIR as corrupt cannot be
considered as “fair” and “true” since he did not do research before making his allegations, and it has been
shown that these allegations were baseless.
- Raissa and Martin are married to each other but had been separated for the last five years. Raissa
decided to wed Juan, her suitor, who had no inkling that she was married. Raissa and Juan accomplished an application for marriage license which they subscribed and swore to before the Local Civil Registrar. Raissa declared in the application that she is single. The marriage licensed was issued. In due time, the couple were married by the mayor. Raissa and Juan had their first sexual intercourse later in the evening.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Raissa commit? Explain briefly. (2008 Bar Question)
Raissa committed bigamy for contracting a second marriage while her first marriage is still subsisting (Art. 349, RPC). She is also guilty of perjury for making untruthful statements under oath or executing an affidavit upon a material matter, when she declared she was not married in the application for marriage license a public document (Art. 171, RPC). Lastly, she is also guilty of adultery (Art. 333, RPC) for having sexual intercourse with Juan although she is a married woman.
Assuming the existence of the first marriage when accused contracted the second marriage and
the subsequent judicial declaration of nullity of the second marriage on the ground of
psychological incapacity, would you render a judgment of conviction or acquittal? Explain your
answer. (2012 Bar Question)
I will render a judgment of conviction.
A declaration of the nullity of the second marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity is not material
insofar as the State s penal la s are concerned. Since a marriage contracted during the subsistence of a valid
marriage is automatically void, the nullity of his second marriage is not per se an argument for the avoidance
of criminal liability for bigamy.
- If you were the judge in a bigamy case where the defense was able to prove that the first marriage
was null and void or a nullity, would you render a judgment of conviction or acquittal? Explain
your answer. (2012 Bar Question)
I will render a judgment of conviction. Proof that the first marriage is null and void is not a defense in
bigamy. As long as the previous marriage was not lawfully dissolved or judicially declared as null and
void, contracting a new marriage constitute bigamy.
- What are the elements of the crime of bigamy? (2012 Bar Question)
The elements of bigamy are as follows: (1) the offender has been legally married; (2) the first marriage has
not been legally dissolved, or in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse has not been judicially
declared presumptively dead; (3) the offender contracts a subsequent marriage; and (4) the subsequent
marriage would have been valid had it not been for the existence of the first.
- What are the three (3) classes of offender in the crime of qualified seduction? Give an example of each. (2007 Bar Question)
The three (3) classes of offenders in the crime of qualified seduction are as follows:
1) Those who exercise moral influence over the victim, such as a priest who acts as spiritual adviser of
the victim, or a teacher in the school where the victim is enrolled; 2) A brother or ascendant by consanguinity of the victim, such as her uncle; and 3) Those ho are regarded as domestic in relation to the victim, enjo ing the confidence and intimacy
shared by members of the same household, such as household helpers and boarders living under the
same roof and with same household as the victim.
- Suspecting that her husband of twenty years was having an affair, Leilanie hired a private
investigator to spy on him. After two weeks, the private investigator showed Leilanie a video of
her husband having sexual intercourse with another woman in a room of a five-star hotel. Based
on what she saw on the video, Leilanie accused her husband of concubinage.
Will the case of concubinage prosper? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)
No, the case for concubinage will not prosper because said crime may be committed only by the husband
in three (3) ways, to wit:
1) By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling; or
2) By having sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife under scandalous circumstances; or
3) By cohabiting with a woman not his wife in any other place (Art. 334, RPC).
Leilanie s husband as not caught under the above circumstances. Thus, the prosecution for the crime
of concubinage will not prosper.
Using his charms because of his movie star looks, Phil, in a movie date with Lyn, a 19-year-old
colegiala, kissed her on the cheek and stroked her pubic hair. Lyn shouted for help and Phil was
arrested. Phil is liable for __________. (2013 Bar Question)
acts of lasciviousness
Filipino citizens Hector and Wendy were married in New York, and have been living happily in
Manila for the last three years. Hector was removing junk from his basement when he came across
an unlabeled recordable cd. He put it in his computer’s DVD drive to check its contents. To his
surprise, he saw a video of Wendy and another man Ariel, in the act of sexual intercourse in the
master’s bedroom of his house. Angered by what he saw, he filed a complaint for adultery against
Wendy and Ariel. During the course of the trial, and again to the surprise of Hector, it was proved that Wendy was born male and underwent sex reassignment later in life. (2015 Bar Question) A) May Hector’s charge of adultery against Wendy and Ariel prosper? Explain. B) What is an impossible crime? Can there be an impossible crime of adultery?
A) Yes, Hector s charge of adulter ill prosper.
Adultery has the following elements: (1) the woman is married; (2) she has sexual intercourse with a
man not her husband; (3) as regards the man with whom she has sexual intercourse, he must know her
to be married.
In the case at hand, the discovery by Hector of the video of Wendy having sexual intercourse with
another man, Ariel, is sufficient to charge his wife with Adultery. The fact that Wendy was later
discovered by Hector to be born male who simply underwent sexual re-assignment later in life, is
immaterial to the charge of Adultery considering that the marriage between the same sex is considered
valid in the US where they were married.
B) An impossible crime is an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means. There is no impossible crime of adultery since this is a crime against chastity, and
not against person or property.
Braulio invited Lulu, his I I-year old stepdaughter, inside the master bedroom. He pulled out a knife
and threatened her with harm unless she submitted to his desires. He was touching her chest and sex
organ when his wife caught him in the act. The prosecutor is unsure whether to charge Braulio for acts
of lasciviousness
under Art. 336 of the RPC, for lascivious conduct under RA 7610 (Special Protection
against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act), or for rape under Art. 266-A of the RPC. What
is the crime committed? Explain. (2016 Bar Question)
Braulio s acts in touching the chest and se organ of Lulu, ho is under 12 ears of age, constitute the
crime of acts of lasciviousness and not attempted rape since the intent to have sexual intercourse is not
clearly shown (People v. Banzuela, G.R. No. 202060, 11 December 2013). Likewise, Braulio s acts can be
considered as sexual abuse under Section 5 (b) of RA No. 7610.
Fe is the manager of a rice mill in Bulacan. In order to support a gambling debt, Fe made it
appear that the rice mill was earning less than it actually was by writing in a “talaan” or ledger a figure lower than what was collected and paid by their customers. Fe then pocketed the difference. What crime/s did Fe commit, If any? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
Fe committed the crimes of: (a) estafa through abuse of confidence or unfaithfulness; and (b) falsification of a private document.
Damage or intent to cause damage, would sustain the case for estafa independently of the falsification of the commercial document. The crime of falsification of a commercial document has already been consummated and the use of said of document to defraud another person would constitute estafa, which constitutes the damage.
In this case, two (2) separate crimes are committed; namely, estafa and falsification of the commercial document. The falsification should not be complexed with the estafa since it was not committed as a necessary means to commit the estafa.
Jervis and Marlon asked their friend, Jonathan, to help them rob a bank. Jervis and Marlon
went inside the bank, but were unable to get any money from the vault because the same was
protected by a time-dela mechanism. The contented themselves with the customer s
cellphones and a total of P5,000 in cash. After they dashed out of the bank and rushed into the
car, Jonathan pulled the car out of the curb, hitting a pedestrian which resulted in the latter s death. What crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon and Jonathan commit? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
Jervis, Marlon and Jonathan committed robbery with homicide, because there was conspiracy among them to commit the robbery and the death of the pedestrian was caused on the occasion of the robbery. Even though the death was accidental, it is enough that such death was caused by any of the robber‟ felonious act and on the occasion of the commission of the robbery.
While walking alone on her way home from a party, Mildred was seized at gun point by Felipe
and taken on board a tricycle to a house some distance away. Felipe was with Julio, Roldan, and Lucio, who drove the tricycle.
At the house, Felipe, Julio, and Roldan succeeded in having sexual intercourse with Mildred against her will and under the threat of Felipe’s gun. Lucio was not around when the sexual assaults took place as he left after bringing his colleagues and Mildred to their destination, but he returned every day to bring food and the news in town about Mildred’s disappearance. For five days, Felipe, Julio and Roldan kept Mildred in the house and took turns in sexually assaulting her. On the 6th day, Mildred managed to escape; she proceeded immediately to the nearest police station and narrated her ordeal.
What crime/s did Felipe, Julio, Roldan, and Lucio commit and what was their degree of participation? (2013 Bar Question)
Felipe, Julio, Roldan and Lucio are all liable for the special complex crime of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Rape. In a special complex crime of Kidnapping with Rape, the resultant crime is only one
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape regardless of the number of rapes committed.
As to the degree of their participation, Felipe, Julio, Roldan and Lucio are all liable as principals. There was
implied conspiracy as they acted toward a single criminal design or purpose. (People vs. Mirandilla, Jr., GR
186417, July 27, 2011). Although Lucio was not around when the sexual assaults took place, there is
complicity on his part as he was the one who drove the tricycle at the time the victim was seized and he
returned every day to bring food and news to his conspirators.
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? (2012 Bar Question)
What is the criminal liability, if any, of a private person who enters the dwelling of another
against the latter’s will and by means of violence or intimidation for the purpose of preventing
C. Under Article 280 of the Revised Penal Code, qualified trespass to dwelling is committed by any
private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter s will and by means of violence
or intimidation. However, the provisions of Article 280 shall not be applicable to any person who shall
enter another s dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to himself.
The three accused forcibly took their victim from his car but the latter succeeded in freeing
himself from their grip. What crime did the three accused commit? (2011 Bar Question)
grave coercion.
A widower of ten years, septuagenarian Canuto felt that he had license to engage in voyeurism.
If not peeping into his neighbors rooms through his powerful single-cylinder telescope, he would
trail young, shapely damsels along the hallways of shopping malls. While going up the escalator,
he stayed a step behind a mini-skirted one, and in a moment of excitement, put his hand on her
left hip and massaged it. The damsel screamed and hollered for help. Canuto was apprehended
and brought up on inquest. What charge/s, if any, may he be held responsible for? Explain. (2010
Bar Question)
Canuto ma be held liable onl for the milder crime of unjust ve ation hich is a form of light coercion
under A rt. 287 of the Revised Penal Code.
Holding the hip of a person is not per se lascivious but undoubtedly annoys, irritates, and vexed the young
offended party.
At the Maligaya Disco Club, Leoncio and Evelyn were intimately dancing a very seductive dance
number. While gyrating with their bodies, Leoncio dipped his private parts in Evel n s buttocks.
Incensed, Evelyn protested, but Leoncio continued and tightly embraced her.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Leoncio commit? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
Leoncio committed the crime of unjust vexation only because the act was done in the course of dancing.
The act of dipping his private parts in Evelyn s buttocks during a very seductive dance, although offensive
to Evelyn, may be viewed as part of a dirty dancing. Lewd intent cannot be presumed from the act of dirty
dancing. Moreover, the act was perpetrated in a public place and with an audience, which negates lewd
design or lascivious intent.
The creditor who resorts to forced labor of a child under the pretext of reimbursing himself for
the debt incurred b the child s father commits the crime of slaver . (2009 Bar Question)
False, the proper offense is exploitation of child labor (Art. 273, RPC). This is committed by a person,
who under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of a minor, shall against the minor s will, retain him in his services.
Virgilio, armed with a gun, stopped a van along a major thoroughfare in Manila, pointed the
gun at the driver and shouted: “Tigil! Kidnap ito!”
Terrified, the driver, Juanito, stopped the van and allowed Virgilio to board. Inside the van were
Jeremias, a 6-year-old child, son of a multi-millionaire, and Dada , the child s nann . Virgilio told
Juanito to drive to a deserted place, and there, ordered the driver to alight. Before Juanito was
allowed to go, Virgilio instructed him to tell Jeremias parents that unless the give a ransom of
P10-million within two (2) days, Jeremias would be beheaded. Daday was told to remain in the van and take care of Jeremias until the ransom is paid. Virgilio then drove the van to his safehouse. What crime or crimes, if any, did Virgilio commit? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
The crime committed against Jeremias, the 6-year-old child, is Kidnapping with Serious Illegal Detention under Art. 267(4) of the Revised Penal Code.
The criminal intent of Virgilio is to deprive Jeremias his liberty to demand ransom. Whether or not the ransom was eventually obtained will not affect the crime committed because the demand for ransom is not an element of the crime; it only qualifies the penalty to death but the imposition of the penalty is now prohibited by Rep. Act. No. 9346.
As to Daday, the nanny of the child who was told to remain in the van and take care of the child until the ransom is paid, the crime committed by Virgilio is Serious Illegal Detention because the offended party deprived of liberty is a female (Art. 267, par.4, RPC).
Virgilio committed Grave Coercion (Art. 286, RPC) for seriously intimidating the driver with a gun pointed at him to drive to a deserted place.
Pinky was a lessee of a market stall owned by Giovanni. When Pinky refused to pay her
rental, Giovanni nailed some wooden barricades on one of the sides of the market stall and posted this warning: “We have closed this portion of the door. Do not open it or else something may happen to you.” What crime/s did Giovanni commit, if any? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
Giovanni committed light coercion or unjust vexation under Art. 287 of the Revised Penal Code. Although what was done by Giovanni could reasonably be assumed as a retaliation to the lessee s refusal to pay rent, there was no violence in the premises, such would not bring about a case of grave coercion.
The ritten arning hich states or else something ma happen to ou is so equivocal that it ma not be interpreted as felonious.
What crime is committed by a capataz who enrolls two fictitious names in the payroll and
collects their supposed daily wages every payday? (2017 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime committed is Estafa through Falsification of Public Documents. A capataz is a foreman for the
government and since the falsification of the public document is committed as a means to commit estafa,
the proper charge is estafa through falsification of public documents.
Val, a Nigerian, set up a perfume business in the Philippines. The investors would buy the raw
materials at a low price from Val. The raw materials consisted of powders, which the investors would mix
with water and let stand until a gel was formed. Val made a written commitment to the investors that he
would buy back the gel at a higher price, thus assuring the investors of a neat profit. When the amounts
to be paid by Val to the investors reached millions of pesos, he sold all the equipment of his perfume business, absconded with the money, and is nowhere to be found.
What crime or crimes were committed, if any? Explain. (2016 Bar Question)
The crim e committed is estafa through false pretenses (Art. 315 par. 2(a)) was committed.
Val defrauded the investors by falsely pretending to possess business or imaginary transactions. The fact that he sold all the equipment of his perfume business and absconded with the money when the amounts to be paid by him to the investors reached millions of pesos shows that his business or the transactions are imaginary, and he defrauded the victims.
Angelino, a Filipino, is a transgender who underwent gender reassignment and had implants in
different parts of her body. She changed her name to Angelina and
was a finalist in the Miss Gay
International. She came back to the Philippines and while she was walking outside her home, she was
abducted by Max and Razzy who took her to a house in the province. She was then placed in a room and
Razzy forced her to have sex with him at knife’s point. After the act, it dawned upon Razzy that Angelina
is actually a male. Incensed, Razzy called Max to help him beat Angelina. The beatings that Angelina
received eventually caused her death. What crime or crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. (2016 Bar
Question)
Razzy is liable for kidnapping with homicide. Since Angelino was killed in the course of the detention, the
crime constitutes kidnapping with homicide under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code.
The abduction of Angelino could not be forcible abduction since the victim must be a woman. Similarly,
there is no rape through sexual intercourse since Angelino remains to be male.
There is also no rape through sexual assault because Razzy neither inserted his penis into the anal orifice
or mouth of Angelino nor another instrument or object into anal orifice or genital orifice. The act
constitutes acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 which was committed by reason or occasion of
kidnapping. Thus, it will be integrated into one and indivisible felony of kidnapping with homicide.
Max is liable for kidnapping with homicide as an accomplice since he concurred in the criminal design of
Razzy in depriving Angelino his liberty and supplied the former material aid in an efficacious way by helping
him beat the latter.
A, B, and C agreed to rob the house of Mr. D at 10 o·clock in the evening, with C as the driver
of the tricycle which they would use in going to and leaving the house of Mr. D, and A and B as
the ones who would enter the house to get the valuables of Mr. D. As planned, C parked the tricycle
in a dark place, while A and B entered the house thru an open door. Once inside, A entered the
master·s bedroom and started getting all the valuables he could see, while B entered another room.
While inside the room, B saw a male person and immediately B brought out his gun but he
accidentally pulled its trigger. The bullet went through the window, hitting a neighbor that killed
him. Neighbors were then awakened by the gunfire and policemen were alerted. Not long after,
policemen arrived. A and B panicked and got hold of a young boy and shouted to the policemen
who were already outside of the house that they would harm the boy if the policemen did not
disperse. A and B demanded that they should be allowed to use a vehicle to bring them to a certain
place and that would be the time that they would release the young boy. The policemen acceded.
In the meantime, C was arrested by the policemen while he was about to flee, while A and B, after
releasing the young boy, were arrested.
What crime/s did A, B, and C commit, and what modifying circumstances attended the
commission of the crime/s? (2014 Bar Question)
A, B, and C, in conspiracy, committed the crime of robbery with homicide under Article 294 of the Revised
Penal Code because the criminal design was to rob Mr. D, and was attended by a killing on the occasion
of the robbery. Even if said death is accidental, the crime is still robbery with homicide because the killing
took place on occasion of the robbery.
The aggravating circumstance of dwelling is present because the crime was committed inside the dwelling
of the offended party who has not given the any provocation.
While walking alone on her way home from a party, Mildred was seized at gun point by Felipe
and taken on board a tricycle to a house some distance away. Felipe was with Julio, Roldan, and
Lucio, who drove the tricycle.
At the house, Felipe, Julio, and Roldan succeeded in having sexual intercourse with Mildred
against her will and under the threat of Felipe’s gun. Lucio was not around when the sexual
assaults took place as he left after bringing his colleagues and Mildred to their destination, but he
returned every day to bring food and the news in town about Mildred’s disappearance. For five
days, Felipe, Julio and Roldan kept Mildred in the house and took turns in sexually assaulting her.
On the 6th day, Mildred managed to escape; she proceeded immediately to the nearest police
station and narrated her ordeal.
What crime/s did Felipe, Julio, Roldan, and Lucio commit and what was their degree of
participation? (2013 Bar Question)
Felipe, Julio, Roldan and Lucio are all liable for the special complex crime of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention with Rape. In a special complex crime of Kidnapping with Rape, the resultant crime is only one
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape regardless of the number of rapes committed.
As to the degree of their participation, Felipe, Julio, Roldan and Lucio are all liable as principals. There was
implied conspiracy as they acted toward a single criminal design or purpose. (People vs. Mirandilla, Jr., GR
186417, July 27, 2011). Although Lucio was not around when the sexual assaults took place, there is
complicity on his part as he was the one who drove the tricycle at the time the victim was seized and he
returned every day to bring food and news to his conspirators.
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? (2012 Bar Question)
) unlawful arrest;
What is the criminal liability, if any, of a private person who enters the dwelling of another
against the latter’s will and by means of violence or intimidation for the purpose of preventing
some harm to himself? (2012 Bar Question)
C. Under Article 280 of the Revised Penal Code, qualified trespass to dwelling is committed by any
private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter·s will and by means of violence
or intimidation. However, the provisions of Article 280 shall not be applicable to any person who shall
enter another·s dwelling for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to himself.
The three accused forcibly took their victim from his car but the latter succeeded in freeing
himself from their grip. What crime did the three accused commit? (2011 Bar Question)
grave coercion.
