Title 10 - [2/2] (313-332) Crimes Against Property

Question 1

313

Answer 1

Altering boundaries or landmark

Question 2

Who is liable for culpable insolvency?

Answer 2

The offender is a debtor and has obligations due and payable.

Question 3

How is estafa committed?

Answer 3

accused defrauded another
- by abuse of confidence or
- by means of deceit and that damage is capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person

Question 4

Elements of Estafa in General

Answer 4

1. That the accused defrauded another
   a. by abuse of confidence, or
   b. by means of deceit.
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person.

Question 5

Subdivisions Classifying Estafa According to the Means by Which the FRAUD is Committed:

Abuse of Confidence - AOC
Means of Deceit - MOD

Answer 5

• With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence [AOC]
• By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts. [MOD]
• Through fraudulent means. [MOD]

Question 6

Abuse of Confidence>Elements of Estafa with Unfaithfulness (1a)

Answer 6

1. That the offender has an onerous (costly/compensation) obligation to deliver something of value.
2. That he alters its substance, quantity or quality.
3. That damage is caused to another.

Question 7

Abuse of Confidence>Elements of Estafa with Abuse of Confidence:
(1b)

Answer 7

1. That [mgop] money, goods, or other personal property be [RECEIVED] by the offender in [tcaoo] trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any of the other obligations involving the [duty to MAKE DELIVERY of], to return the same.
2. That there be misappropriation or conversion of such [mp] money or property by the offender or denial on his part of such receipt.
3. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another, and
4. That there is demand made by the offended party to the offender.

Question 8

Abuse of Confidence>Elements of Estafa by Taking Advantage of the Signature in blank (1c)

Answer 8

1. That the paper with the signature of the offended party be in blank.
2. That the offended party should have delivered it to the offender.
3. That above the signature of the offended party a document is written by the offender without authority to do so.
4. That the document so written creates a liability of, [or] causes damage to the offended party or any third person.

[gpt]
suppose someone signs a blank check and gives it to another person with the understanding that it will be filled out later with the appropriate amount and payee. If the recipient fills in the check with a larger amount than agreed upon or to a different payee, without the authority to do so, it could constitute estafa by taking advantage of a signature in blank.

Question 9

Means of Deceit>Elements of Estafa by Means of Deceit (2)

Answer 9

1. That there must be a [map] false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means.
   - map to deceive people
2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed [PRIOR TO or SIMULTANEOUSLY] with the commission of the fraud.
3. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means, that is, he was [induced] to part with his money or property because of false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means.
4. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damages.

Question 10

Kinds of Estafa Committed Under this provision (Estafa by MOD)

Answer 10

1. By using fictitious name.
2. By falsely pretending to possess [PPICABQ] - peekabo! estafa mf!
   a. power
   b. influence
   c. qualifications
   d. Property
   e. Credit
   f. Agency
   g. business or imaginary transactions, or
3. By means of similar deceits.

Question 11

MOD>Elements of Estafa by [Means of FRAUDULENT ACTS] (not MODeceit)

Answer 11

1. The acts must be fraudulent, that is the acts must be characterized by or founded on deceit or trick or cheat.
2. Note that while in false pretenses, the deceit consists in the use of deceitful words, in fraudulent acts, the deceit consists principally in deceitful acts.
   - fp= deceitful words
   - fa = deceitful actions (principally)
3. This being estafa by means of deceit, the fraudulent acts must be performed [prior to or simultaneously] with the commission of the fraud.
4. Like in other forms of deceit, the offender must be able to obtain something from the offended party because of the fraudulent acts that is, without which, the offended party would not have parted with it.

Question 12

MOD>Elements of Estafa By Postdating a Check or Issuing a Check in Payment of an Obligation:

Answer 12

1. That the offender postdated a check, or issued a check in payment of an obligation.
2. That such postdating or issuing a check was done when the offender had no funds in the bank [or] is funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check

note
- The check issued must be genuine.

• If the check is falsified and the same is cashed with the bank or exchanged for cash, the crime committed is [estafa through falsification of commercial document].
• When postdated checks are issued and intended by the parties only as promissory notes, there is no estafa even if there are no sufficient funds in the bank to cover the same.

The failure of the drawer (issuer) of the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover for his check within three (3) days from receipt of notice from the bank and/or payee or holder that said check has been dishonored for lack of or insufficiency of the funds shall be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent acts

Question 13

Elements of Estafa By Inducing Another to
Sign Any Document:

Answer 13

1. That the offender [induced] the offended party to sign a document
2. That the deceit be employed to make him sign the document
3. That the offended party personally signed the document that prejudice is caused.

Question 14

Estafa by resorting to some fraudulent practice to insure success in a gambling
game:

Answer 14

The rule in Civil Law that no action can be filed on an immoral or illegal contract
(art. 1141,CC) has no application in the prosecution of estafa, even if the offended party consented to the fraudulent scheme.

Question 15

Elements of Estafa By Removing, Concealing or Destroying Documents:

Answer 15

1. That there be court record, office files, documents, or any other papers.
2. That the offender removed, concealed or destroyed any of them.
3. That the offender had intent to defraud another

note
If there is no intent to defraud, the act of destroying court record will be malicious mischief.

Question 16

Estafa by removing, concealing or destroying documents vs Infidelity in the custody of documents (Art. 226)

Answer 16

• intent to defraud
• private v. public persons

The infidelity in the custody of documents, as defined in Art. 226, and this kind of estafa are similar in that the manner of committing the offense is the same.

But while in Art.226, the offender is a public officer who is officially entrusted with the document, in this kind of estafa, the offender is a private individual or even a public officer who is not officially entrusted with the documents.

In estafa, there is intent to defraud. This element is not required in art. 266.

diff w/ intent to defraud
w/o intent to defraud

by private or public in private capacity
by public persons

same acts

Question 17

Estafa’s General Element
1. defrauded another by means of AoC and MoD
2 Damage or Prejudice Capable of Pecuniary Estimation

provide the elements of 2

Answer 17

The element of damage or prejudice may consist in:
1. The offended party being deprived of his money, property, as a result of defraudation.
2. Disturbance in property rights.
3. Temporary prejudice.

Question 18

when will misappropriation of money or property entrusted to another constitute theft and when will it constitute estafa

Answer 18

misappropriation - taking of something for one’s own benefit

A person who misappropriated the thing which he had received from the offended party may be guilty of theft, not estafa, if he acquired only the material or physical possession of the thing
- MP + M = theft

If in receiving the thing from the offended party, the offender acquired also the juridical possession (JP) of the thing, and he later misappropriated it, he would be guilty of estafa.
- JP + MP + M = estafa

Question 19

What is the nature of the damage suffered by the offended party?

Answer 19

Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation

Question 20

What are the elements of estafa through
conversion or misappropriation?

Answer 20

IDK

Question 21

Will the return of the money to the victim free the accused from criminal liability?

Answer 21

Payment made subsequent to the commission of estafa does not extinguish criminal liability nor does it reduce the penalty

The basis of the penalty in estafa is the amount or the value of the property misappropriated and not delivered or returned before the institution of the criminal action.

Question 22

How is demand made upon the person charged of estafa?

Answer 22

The demand to fulfill the trust or return the thing received must be made formally and BEFORE the action is filed. The circumstance that the offended party failed to locate the accused did not dispense with the compliance with the requirement of the law;

If the [offender is in hiding], prior demand is NOT necessary to institute the criminal action.

The disappearing act of the offender is a clear indication of a premeditated intention to abscond with the thing he received from the offended party. The proven facts showed that the offender could not have complied with the demand, even if it had been made

Question 23

Can estafa be committed through negligence?

Answer 23

No. In case of estafa, the profit or gain must be obtained by the accused personally, through his own acts, and his mere negligence in permitting another to take advantage of, or benefit from, the entrusted chattel cannot constitute estafa under Article 315(l-b)

[gpt]
In the case of malversation, there is a provision that explicitly addresses situations where the agent allows another person to benefit from or take advantage of the entrusted property through negligence. This means that in malversation cases, the agent can be held criminally liable for allowing someone else to misuse the entrusted property, even if they did not personally benefit from it.

However, in the case of estafa, there is no similar provision that allows for criminal liability based solely on negligence. The absence of such a provision is significant because it indicates that estafa requires the accused to personally obtain a profit or gain through their own actions. Mere negligence in permitting another person to benefit from the entrusted property is not sufficient to constitute estafa under Article 315(l-b) of the law.

Question 24

When the violator is a corporation or other juridical entities, on whom is the penalty imposed?

Answer 24

IDK

Art. 186 (Monopolies & Combination in Restraint of Trade)

borrowing from 186, corporations or other entities who commit estafa, the president, each one of the managers will be liable if they
(1) knowingly permitted
(2) failed to prevent the commission of the offebes

Question 25

Is the crime of estafa the same as violation of BP 22?

Answer 25

No. It is Estafa when, among others, you issue an unfunded check with fraudulent intent in consideration of something of value you received. Here intent is material and good faith may be used as a defense. It is a case for Violation of BP 22 when you issue an unfunded check whether or not it is for an obligation you contracted prior to the issuance of the check or not. Simply put, you are liable for BP 22 whether you issue a check for a present or a past obligation

B.P. Big. 22 requires the drawer’s knowledge of lack or insufficiency of funds in the drawee bank at the time of issuance of the check, the Revised Penal Code does not require such knowledge. (U.S. vs. Capurro, et al., supra)

Question 26

If the court acquires jurisdiction over the former, does it necessarily acquire jurisdiction over the latter?

Answer 26

IDK

Is the crime of estafa the same as violation of BP 22?
No. It is Estafa when, among others, you issue an unfunded check with fraudulent intent in consideration of something of value you received. Here intent is material and good faith may be used as a defense. It is a case for Violation of BP 22 when you issue an unfunded check whether or not it is for an obligation you contracted prior to the issuance of the check or not.

Simply put, you are liable for BP 22 whether you issue a check for a present or a past obligation B.P. Big. 22 requires the drawer’s knowledge of lack or insufficiency of funds in the drawee bank at the time of issuance of the check, the Revised Penal Code does not require such knowledge. (U.S. vs. Capurro, et al., supra)

Question 27

316

Answer 27

Other Forms of Swindling

Question 28

how are other forms of swindling (316) committed?

Answer 28

1. [Any person] who, pretending to be owner of any real property, shall convey, sell, encumber or mortgage the same.

convey - transfer of legal title/ownership
encumber - restrict property w/ legal claim
mortgage - put real property as collateral for loan

2. [Any person], who, knowing that real property is encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although such encumbrance be not recorded.
3. [The owner] of any personal property who shall wrongfully take it from its lawful [possessor], to the prejudice of the latter or any third person.
4. [Any person] who, to the prejudice of another, shall execute any fictitious contract.
   - [ex] Simulating a conveyance of his property to another for the purpose of defrauding another
5. [Any person] who shall accept any compensation given him under the belief that it was in payment of services rendered or labor performed by him, when in fact he did NOT actually perform such services or labor.
6. [Any person] who, while being a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action,
   - without express authority from the court or
   - before the **cancellation of his bond **or
   - before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him,

shall sell, mortgage, or, in any other manner, encumber the real property or properties with which he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation.

• surety = 3rd person’s real property as collateral
• mortgage = party’s themselves put their property as collateral

Question 29

316’s par 1 elements

1. [Any person] who, pretending to be owner of any real property, shall convey, sell, encumber or mortgage the same.

Answer 29

1. That the thing immovable, such as a parcel of land or building.
2. That the offender who is not the owner of said property should represent that he is the owner thereof.
3. That the offender should have executed an act of ownership (selling, leasing, encumbering, mortgaging the real property.)
4. That the act be made to the prejudice of the owner or a third person.

Question 30

316’s par. 2 elements

2. [Any person], who, knowing that real property is encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although such encumbrance be not recorded.

Answer 30

1. That the thing disposed of be real property.
2. That the offender knew that the real property was encumbered, whether the encumbrance is recorded or not.
3. That there must be express representation by the offender that the real property be free from encumbrance.
4. That the act of disposing of the real property be made to the damage of another.

[ex]
Person A owns a piece of land that has a mortgage on it, but this mortgage is not recorded in any official records. Person A, knowing about the mortgage, decides to sell the land to Person B without disclosing the existence of the mortgage. Person B, unaware of the encumbrance, purchases the land from Person A.

In this case, Person A has committed estafa by disposing of the property without disclosing the encumbrance, thereby deceiving Person B and causing potential financial harm.

Question 31

316’s par. 3 elements

3. [The owner] of any personal property who shall wrongfully take it from its lawful [possessor], to the prejudice of the latter or any third person.

Answer 31

1. That the offender is the owner of personal property.
2. That the said personal property is in the lawful possession of another.
3. That the offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful possessor.
4. That the prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or third person.

[ex.]
John, the owner of a piece of land, forcefully removes Sarah, lawful possessor, by virtue of lease agreement.

Question 32

316’s par. 6 elements

6. [Any person] who, while being a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action,
   - without express authority from the court or
   - before the cancellation of his bond or
   - before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him,

shall sell, mortgage, or, in any other manner, encumber the real property or properties with which he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation.

Answer 32

1. That the offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action.
2. That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation with his real property or properties.
3. That he sells, mortgages, or in any manner encumbers said real property.
4. That such sale, mortgage, or encumbrance is
   a. without express authority from the court,
   b. made before the cancellation of his bond,
   c. before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him.

Question 33

How is estafa committed in case of selling of encumbered property under Par.2 of Art. 316?

Answer 33

A mortgaged his property to B. Later, A, misrepresenting that said property is free from encumbrance, mortgaged it again, this time to C.

Question 34

May the owner of the property commit estafa involving his own property?

Answer 34

yes. par. 3 of 316

Question 35

317

Answer 35

Swindling a Minor

Question 36

Elements of swindling a minor

Answer 36

1. That the offender takes advantage of the inexperience or emotions or feelings of a minor.
2. That he induces such minor
   (1) to assume an obligation,
   (b) to give release,
   (c) to execute a transfer of any property right.
3. That the consideration is (1) some loan of money, (2) credit or (3) other personal property.
4. That the transaction is to the detriment of such minor.

Question 37

318

Answer 37

Other Deceit

Question 38

ACts punished of 318 (Other Deceits)

Answer 38

 By defrauding or damaging another by any other deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles.

 By interpreting dreams, by making forecasts, by telling fortunes, or by taking advantage of the credulity (gullibility) of the public in any other similar manner, for profit or gain.

Question 39

319

Answer 39

Art. 319. Removal, sale, or pledge of mortgaged property.

Question 40

What is penalized in Art. 319. Removal, sale, or pledge of mortgaged property.

Answer 40

By knowingly removing any personal property mortgaged under the chattel mortgage law to any [province or city] other than the one in which it was located at the time of the execution of the mortgage, WITHOUT the written consent of the [meaa] mortgagee or his executors, administrators or assigns.

• chattel = tangible movable personal property
• John mortgaged his car to ABC Bank in City A to secure a loan. If John moves the car to City B without obtaining written consent from ABC Bank, he would be in violation of the Chattel Mortgage Law.

By selling or pledging personal property already pledged or any part thereof under the terms of the chattel mortgage law,
- without the consent of the morgagee
- written on the back of the mortgage and
- noted on the record thereof in the office of the register of deeds of the province where such property is located.

• John attempts to sell his car to another person or pledge it as collateral for another loan without ABC Bank’s consent, it would be a violation of the Chattel Mortgage Law.
• Pledging personal property means offering it as security for a debt or obligation without transferring ownership

Question 41

Distinguish Other Forms of Swindling (316 par. 2) and Removal, sale, or pledge of mortgaged property (319)

Answer 41

316
- real
- to constitute estafa, sufficient that real property is mortgaged
- protects purchaser

319
- personal
- selling/pledging of personal property already pledged is committed by mere failure to obtain consent of the mortgagee
- protects mortgagee

Question 42

320

Answer 42

Destructive Arson

Question 43

What are the elements of arson under sec. 3of PD no. 1613?

Answer 43

The elements of arson under this section are:
1. There is intentional burning
2. What is intentionally burned is an inhabited house or dwelling

Section 3(2) of PD no. 1613 which imposes on the arsonist the penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua if the property burned is an inhabited house or dwelling.

Question 44

How is the corpus delicti in arson satisfied?

Corpus delicti means the substance of the crime

Answer 44

In arson, the corpus delicti rule is generally satisfied by proof of the bare occurrence of the fire, e.g., the charred remains of a house burned down and of its having been intentionally caused.

Even the uncorroborated (not supported/proved by evidence) testimony of a single eyewitness, if credible, may be enough to prove the corpus delicti and to warrant conviction.

Proof of the corpus delicti is indispensable in the prosecution of arson, as in all kinds of criminal offenses. Corpus delicti means the substance of the crime; it is the fact that a crime has actually been committed.

Question 45

Who should be the owner of the property burned?

• who is liable for arson

Answer 45

A person who burns or sets fire to the property of another

A person sets fire to his own property under circumstances which expose to danger the life or property of another

Question 46

What are and When will the special aggravating circumstance of spite not be appreciated?

Answer 46

• If committed with intent to gain;
• If committed for the benefit of another;
• If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred towards the owner or occupant of the property burned;
• If committed by a syndicate (gr. who commit crime)

The special aggravating circumstance that accused-appellant was “motivated by spite or hatred towards the owner or occupant of the property burned” cannot be appreciated in the present case where it appears that he was acting more on impulse, heat of anger or risen temper rather than real spite or hatred that impelled him to give vent to his wounded ego.

Nothing can be worse than a spurned lover or a disconsolate father under the prevailing circumstances that surrounded the burning of the Cimagala house. Thus, accused-appellant must be held guilty of Simple Arson penalized under Sec. 3, par. 2, of PD 1613 for the act of intentionally burning an inhabited house or dwelling. (Duebos vs. The People of the Ph

Question 47

How much of the property must be burned to consummate arson?

Answer 47

Valdes - frustrated before it burned the bldg.
Hernandez - no matter how small, consummated

In the case of U.S. vs. Valdes, Phil. 240, if the defendant has started a blaze by burning rags soaked with gasoline placed near the building but the fire is put out before any part of the building commences to burn, the crime is frustrated arson; and in the case of People vs. Hernandez, 54 Phil. 122, if a part of the building commences to burn, the crime is consummated arson, however small is the portion of the building burned. (People vs. Go Kay, C.A., 54 O.G. 2225)

Question 48

321-326-B repealed by sec. 9 PD no. 1613

Answer 48

321-326-B repealed by sec. 9 PD no. 1613

Question 49

How can Malicious Mischief be committed?

Answer 49

it is the willful damaging of another’s property for the sake of causing damage due [hrm] to hate, revenge or other evil motive.

Question 50

What is the nature of the crime when in arson, a person dies?

Answer 50

• SCC(?)

If as a consequence of the commission of any of the acts penalized under Art. 320, death should result, the mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed (Art. 320, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7659). However, pursuant to Rep. Act No. 9346 which prohibited the imposition of the death penalty, the mandatory penalty of death for Destructive Arson where death ensues is now downgraded to reclusion perpetua with no eligibility for parole.

Question 51

Who are the relatives benefited by the absolutory circumstances in art. 332?

Answer 51

No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the commission of the crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following persons:

• [sadr] Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line.
• The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have passed into the possession of another; and
• Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together.

Question 52

Distinguish malicious mischief from unjust vexation.

Answer 52

MM (327)
The offender’s act caused damage to another’s property for the sake of causing damage due to hate, revenge or other evil motive

(287)
The offender’s act caused [ddivat] annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed.

Question 53

327

Answer 53

Who Are Liable for Malicious Mischief

Question 54

328

Answer 54

Special cases of malicious mischief.

Question 55

329

Answer 55

Other mischiefs

Question 56

330

Answer 56

Damage and obstruction to means of communication

Question 57

331

Answer 57

Destroying or damaging statutes, public monuments, or paintings

Question 58

332

Answer 58

Persons exempt from criminal liabilty

Question 59

Elements of Malicious Mischief

Answer 59

1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of another.
2. That such act do NOT constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction
   .
3. That the act of damaging another’s property be committed merely for the sake of damaging it, which presupposes that the offender acted with [hrm] hate, revenge, or other evil motive.

Question 60

For what crimes are they exempted?

Answer 60

Theft
Swindling
Malicious Mischief

Question 61

Distinguish malicious mischief from theft.

Answer 61

MM
- no intent to gain

Theft
- After damaging the property, the offender removes or makes use of the fruits or objects of the damage. There is intent to gain.