Title 2: Crimes Against the Fundamental Laws of the State Flashcards
Offenders under this title. What is the general rule and the Exception
GR:
Offenders are public officers or employees
Exceptions:
1. Art 133 (Offending Religious Feelings): The offender may be any person.
2. When a private person conspires with a public officer or acts as accomplice or accessory in the commission of the crime.
Classes of Arbitrary Detention
- Detaining a person without legal ground (Art 124)
- Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper authorities (Art 125)
- Delaying release (Art 126)
Elements of Arbitrary Detention
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
PDD
- Offender is a public officer or employee vested with authority and jurisdiction to effect arrest and detain a person
- If private person or no authority to detain, illegal detention - He detains a person
- Detention is without legal grounds
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
What is “Without legal ground”
- When he has not committed any crime or at least there is no reasonable ground of rsuspicion that he has committed a crime
- When he is not suffering from violent insanity or any other ailment requiring compulsory confinement in a hospital
When is there detention?
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Curtailment of the victim’s liberty need not involve any physical restraint. The acts of the accused can produce fear in the mind of the victim sufficient to compel the victim to limit his own actions and movements in accordance to the wishes of the accused.
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Legal Grounds for the Detention of Persons
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
- Commission of a crime
a. Arrest with a warrant
b. Warrantless Arrest (only for certain instances) - Violent insanity or other ailment requiring compulsary confinement of the patient in a hospital
Exceptions: When the peace officers acted in good faith even if the grounds mentioned above are not obtained.
Instances of a valid warrantless arrest
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
- In Falgrante Delicto: When, in his presence, that person to be arrrested has committed, is* actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense.*
- Hot Pursuit:When an offense has in fact been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts and circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it.
- Escaping Prisoner: When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment.
“in his prescense” = sees or hear the offense and proceeds at once
Probable Cause
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Determination of probable cause by arresting officer is based on his personal knowledge of acts and circumstances that the person sought to be arrested has committed.
The legality of the detention of a person does not depend upon the actual commission of a crime but opon the nature of the deed when its characterization as a crime may be reasonably inferred by the officer to whome the law at the moment leaves he decision for the urgent purpose of suspening the liberty of that person
Requirements for a valid warrantless arrest
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
- the person to be arrested must execute an overt act indicating that he has just committed and is actually committing, or is attempting to commit a crime
- such overt act is done in the prescense or within the view of an arresting officer
- Does not require that the arresting officers to personally witness the commission of the offense with their own eyes
Plain View Doctrine
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Objects in the plain view of an officer who has the right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seizure and may be presented as evidence.
Arbitrary Detention v. Illegal Detention (Art. 267)
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Arbitrary: Must be a public officer with authority to detain a person
Illegal Detention: May be private person or public officer who does not have the power to arrest.
Arbitrary Detention v. Unlawful Arrest
Art 124: Detaining a person without legal ground
Arbitrary Detention
- Public officer detains a person without legal ground and with no intention to bring the offended to proper authority
Unlawful Arrest (269)
- Any person who brings the victim to proper authority but arrest is without reasonable ground
Situation Contemplated in Delay in Delivery
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
Arrest must be made without a warrant but there exists a legal ground for the arrest.
If there is a warrant, a person may be detained indefinitely as information has already been filed against him, making delivery to the court unnecessary.
Elements of Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial Authority
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
- Offender is a Public officer or employee
- He has detained a person for some legal ground but without a warrant of arrest; and
- He fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within:
- 12 hrs for crimes punishable by light penalties or their equivalent
- 18 hrs for crimes punishable by correctional penalties or their equivalent
- 36 hrs for crimespunishable by afflictive penalties or their equivalent
“or their equivalent” = applicable to SPLs
“Deliver” = filing of correct information with the proper judicial authorities. It does not mean physical delivery or turnover of arrested person to court.
What are the Light, Correctional, and Afflictive Penalties?
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
Light: Arresto Menor or a fine of <=40,000 or both
Correctional:
- Prision Correccional
- Arresto Mayor
- Suspension
- Destierro
- Fine of 40,000<x<=1,200,000
Afflictive
- Reclusion Perpetua
- Reclusion Temporal
- Prision Mayor
- Fine of greater than 1,200,000
How does it apply to detained terrorists? (mentioned in the previous title)
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
Any police with authorization from the Anti-Terrorism Council shall deliver suspected person to proper judicial authority within a perod of 3 days from time of arrest.
Arbitrary Detention v. Delay in the Delivery of Detained Person
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
Arbitrary Detention: illegal at the very inception
Delay: Legal at the outset but becomes arbitrary when the detention exceeds any of the periods of time specified
Rights of the Person Detained
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
- He shall be informed of the cause of his detention
- He shall be allowed to communicate with his counsel
In sum, the arresting officer must comply with Art 125 and file a case immediately in court without preliminary investigation
What happens if he waives his right under Art 125?
Art 125: Delay in the Delivery of Detained Persons
There will be a preliminary investigation.
Punishable Acts under Delaying Release
Art 126: Delaying Release
PSP
- By delaying the Performance of a judicial or executive order for the release of a prisoner
- By unduly delaying the Service of the notice of such order to said prisoner; and
- By unduly delaying the Proceedings upon any petition for the libration of such person
Elements of Delaying Release
Art 126: Delaying Release
- Offender is a Public Officer or employee
- There is a Judicial or Executive Order for the release of the prisoner, or that there is a proceeding upon a petiton for the liberation of such person; and
- Offender without good reason delays
- the Service of the notice of such order to the prisoner
- the Performance of such judicial or executive order for the release of the prisoner
- the Proceedings upon a petition for the release of such person
Punishable Acts of Expulsion
Art 127: Expulsion
- Expelling a person from the PH
- can be commited only against aliens
- can be done only by the President - Compelling a person to change his residence
- can be against aliens and Filipinos
- can be done by the court (ejectment, expropriation, destierro)
Elements of Expulsion
Art 127: Expulsion
- Offender is a public officer or employee
- He either commits either of the two punishable acts
- He is not authorized to do so by law (President for Expulsion; Court for Change of Residence)
Punishable Acts of Violation of Domicile
Art 128: Violation of Domicile
- Entering any dwelling against the will of the owner
- “against the will of the owner” = opposition and not merely abscense of consent
- may be implied so can be when the door is closed even though it’s not locked - Searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of the owner
- Refusing to leave the premises after having secretly entered said dwelling and after having been required to leave the same
- what is punished here is refusal to leave, since entry was made in secret
Sufficient if the inhabitant is the lawful occupant
Elements of Violation of Domicile
Art 128: Violation of Domicile
- Public Officer
- if private person, then it is trespass to dwelling - Not authorized by Judicial Order
- no search warrant - Does any of the punishable acts
Qualifying Circumstances of Violation of Domicile
Art 128: Violation of Domicile
- Committed at Nighttime
- Papers not constituting evidence of a crime are not returned immediately after the search
Punishable Acts under Search Warrant Maliciously Obtained and Abuse in the Service of those Legally Obtained
Art 129: Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained and Abused
ISEU
- illegal search warrant
- exceeding authority or
- unnecessary severity in execution of a legal search warrant
- Procuring a search warrant without just cause
- offender is a public officer
- he procures a search warrant
- there is no just cause
- illegal search warrant when there is no probable cause -
Exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant legally procured
- offender is a public officer
- they have legally procured a search warrant
- exceeded their authority or use unnecessary severity in executing it
- eg. destroys furniture
- may still forcefully enter if after giving notice of purpose and authority
Requisites for the Issueance of a Search Warrant
Art 129: Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained and Abused
- There is Probable Cause in onnection with one specific offense
- to be Determined by the judge
- After Examination of complainant and witnesses under oath
- Decribing the places to be searched
- and the Things to be seized
- which may be Anywhere in the PH
Consequence of Evidence Obtained thru an illegal search warrant
Art 129: Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained and Abused
Evidence is not admissible for any purpose in the proceeding
Elements of Searching Domicile without Witnesses
Art 130: Searching Domicile without Witnesses
- Public Officer or Employee
- He is Armed with a search warrant legally procured
- He Searches the domicile, papers, or other belongings of any person
- papers or other belongings must be in the dwelling - Owner or any member of his family, or two witnesses residing in the same locality are not present
Witnesses must be in the following order
1. Homeowner
2. A Member of the family of legal age and discretion
3. Two witnesses of legal age and discretion in the barangay
Punishable Acts under Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
Art 131: Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
- Prohibiting , interrupting, or dissolving without legal ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting
- denial of permit to peacefully assemble - Hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings
- Prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities for correction of abuses or redress of grievances
Offender must be
- a public officer
- a stranger to the meeting; if a participant, unjust vexation
- if private individual, tumults and disturbance of public order (Art. 153(2))
Is requiring a permit construed as preventing peaceful assemblies?
Art 131: Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
Requiring a persmit shall be in exercise only of government’s regulatory power and not really to prevent peaceful assemblies.The requirement is legal as long as it is not being exercised as prohibitory power.
Arbitrary denial of permit by the officer falls under this article.
Prohibition, Interruprion, or dissolution of peaceful meetings (Art. 131) vs. Tumults and other disturbances (Art. 153)
Art 131: Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
Prohibition: Offender is a public officer who is not a participant.
Tumults and other distrubances:
- public officer is a participant
- private person can be a participant or not
Elements of Interruption of Religious Worship
Art 132: Interruption of Religious Worship
- Offender is a Public Officer or Employee
- If private individual, tumults and other disturbances of public order (Art. 153(2)) - Religious ceremonies, or manifestation of any religion are about to take place or are going on
- does not need to be in a religious place
- if only a meeting or rally, without any religious rights, then it is punishable under Art. 131: Prohibition, Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings - Offender prevents or disturbs the same
- “disturbs” = not necessarily stop
Qualifying Circumstance of Interruption of Religious Worship
Art 132: Interruption of Religious Worship
If crime is committed with violence or threats
Elements of Offending the Religious Feelings
Art 133: Offending the Religious Feelings
- Offender is ANYONE (only article in this Title which is not committed by a public officer)
- The acts complained of were performed:
- in a place devoted to religious worship OR
- during the celebration of any religious ceremony (can be outside the church: processions, etc.)
Note: Thus, it is not necessary that there is religious worship.
- Acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful
- there must be a deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful. Hence, constructing a fence in the middle of a pabasa, even though irritating, is not notoriously offensive.
- the acts must be directed against the religious practice, dogma, or ritual for the purpose of ridicule as mocking at an object of religious veneration; hence, threatening a priest due to his opinion during the homily is not mocking religious feelings under Art 133 but interruption of religious worship under Art 132.
- looked at the complainant’s standpoint and not from that of the offender
To sum up,
- anyone and against religious feelings: art 133
- private indiv and not against religious feeelings: unjust vexation
- public officer and not against religious feelings: Art 132
