You are on page 1of 7

JULY 8, 2013

Art 6 - definition of consummated frustrated and attempted felonies; deals with the stages of
material crimes.

NOTE: penalties depend upon the nature of the participation of the accused. Depends on the
stage and participation:
Example.
consummated - accused is the principal,consummated - accomplice,consummated - accessory,
frustrated - principal,frustrated - accomplice important rules to consider prior to the subject of
penalties.

you cannot ascertain the intention of the accused of his acts, whether it is intended for robbery
or estafa or theft so you need an external act that you can appreciate to be with the criminal
intent of the accused.

attempted felony - the offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt
acts(external acts, seen acts, manifested, or expressed,seen or hear).

what is an overt act of homicide?
the act of raising a bolo as if to struck is not an overt act of homicide. he has not not committed
any attempt to kill or harm that person. what is required to this person to be held liable to the
attempted stage is to strike that bolo to the victim. strike at the person.if it is a gun, raising a
pistol as if to shoot is not an overt act of homicide. what is required is for that gun to be
discharged. if magpabuto sa ibabao that is not an homicide, that is a crime of illegal discharge
of a firearm.
is it required that the victim should be hit?
no.
if not hit, attempted stage. it may not be maigo, if maigo it must be that the injury is not grave
because if the injury is serious then you may consider all acts of execution already performed
but the victim does not die because of medical intervention.

if it is in the mind of the accused to struck his bolo but stops, he is not liable by reason of
spontaneous desistance. he is in control of his action and he has decided to forego with his
intention to strike so he remains in that position and then desist. there is no crime committed.
although you consider that raising a pistol might also be already a crime of grave threats
because there is that threat by a person's security of life by that gun.
but for the overt acts, you have to have a relation to the act not to relate the act with the
intention. so if this is the only cause or act that you can see, you cannot relate that the person
will actually hit and harm the victim. therefore this is only a preparatory act, not act of
execution, not an external act of homicide. so as it is, you cannot determine if he is going to kill
the victim. so it is important that you have an overt act that is associated with the crime
committed.
Raising a bolo as if to strike may already be unlawful aggression. so it is important for the
accused to put up a defence that is self defence because there is a threatened assault.

if the act result to a minor injury, not vital, then it is just physical injury. but if it is hit on the vital
part - head,abdomen,back; then it is a more serious intent-there is intent to kill. the accused
would have to prove that his intention is otherwise.
but as it is based on the part of the body that was hit and base on the nature, the proper
charge would be FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE, MURDER. If the victim is dies, then it is
CONSUMMATED HOMICIDE.

Frustrated if all acts had been committed but then the victim does not die, he was medically
treated (Might not be improbable that other people have saved the victim because it was
already inflicted).

for the attempted stage, he is held liable if the acts of execution is not completed by reason of
some other cause not attributable to the spontaneous desistance of the accused.
Example.
the accused fires his gun to the victim but the victim evades the bullet. the act of firing is
already the overt act of homicide but because the victim avoided the bullet that was fired at
him, the accused may be held liable for attempted homicide. so it does not mean that the
victim must get hit for it to be attempted, what is required is that there must be actual
discharge of the gun.

NOTE: The difference between attempted and frustrated is that in frustrated, had not been
that the victim been operated by the surgeon, the victim would die. that is the intent that
prevent the consummation. And that intent, is totally independent of the will of the accused. in
the frustrated stage, it is beyond him already to stop the effects of his crime but then it is not
produced not by his own act but by the immediate medical attendance.

read Catangay..

NOTE: It is important to consider the intention, each crime has a specific intent.

pp vs Lamahang - tha accused was caught removing the wall of the store. as he was
about to enter into the store he was caught. so with that, you cannot sense what his criminal
intent was.
was he thinking of committing robbery?
you cant determine. theft? kill the owner? you cannot identify the criminal intent. but the act of
entering, removing the wall is already the overt act of attempted trespass to dwelling. best
example for INDETERMINATE OFFENSE.
what is required for the trespass to be consummated?
the accused must be inside the house. both feet.
how can you can to set the crimes into stages?
3 factors: MEN
1. nature of the crime committed - attempted, frustrated, consummated
2. elements of the crime - of theft?of treason?liable?physical injuries?(book 2)
what happens if not all the elements are present?
attempted stage or frustrated.
3. manner of committing the felony -
specific crimes:

THEFT
it is consummated, when the thief is able to take or get hold of the thing belonging to another
even if he is not able to dispose it.
NOTE: there is no frustrated theft.
valenzuela
SC said that it ought to be consummated already because the object is already in the
disposal/possession of the accused. the fact that the accused was not able to dispose of it is not
an element. element is the actual taking/possessing these properties that are stolen.

ESTAFA
consummated, if the offended party is damaged/prejudiced(element in estafa). frustrated,
when the person is caught while he is taking the money.
NOTE: there is no frustrated n estafa.
dominguez
a salesman receiving an amount but then he did not return it to the cashier. he
misappropriated. he converted his collection, there is damage caused.

ARSON
a portion of the building is burned, it is already CONSUMMATED arson. but if things inside the
house is burned is FRUSTRATED arson. if there is combustible materials in the house and the
accused is caught trying to set fire, it is ATTEMPTED arson. if people(MURDER).

RAPE
not required that there is full penetration. it is sufficient that the labia is penetrated. it is not the
hymen required to be penetrated. mons pubis is not sufficient. if one merely graze through or
making motions of push and pull on the mons pubis, that is not rape, only ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS. what do you feel?pain. what part is painful?if the victim can describe if it is
not clear and in case of doubt, only act of lasciviousness. testimony of the victim is crucial.
medical certificate - if there are no injuries, it doesn't mean that there is no rape.
NOTE: no frustrated rape. no half measures in rape. BOMBARDMENT OF THE DRAWBRIDGE
IS ALREADY INVASION OF THE CASTLE.

JULY 12, 2013
...continuation
libel - no attempted libel; no stages

ART. 5 - duties of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but which should
be covered by law. and in instances where the court finds that the penalties are excessive.

2 duties of the court:
1. if the court finds that there are acts that needed to be repressed.
there is no law that punishes it as a crime then the duty of the judge is to dismiss the case but
then he thinks that this act must be punished because it is reprehensible. his duty is to report so
that he could recommend that this could be a subject of legislation. the judge can do so by
forcing it to the department of justice.
2. if the court finds he penalties excessive
*orals*
what should the court do?
what is the proper decision?
what should the court do?
why should the court acquit the accused or dismiss the case?
what rule or principle of the law is affirmed?
how about the 2nd duty,what is it?
does the court have authority to lessen?

NOTE: DURA LEX SED LEX & NULLUM CRIMEN NULLA POENA SIGE LEGE. two latins that
abide the two duties.

on the second duty, there is a law; there is a punishment. but then he thinks that the
punishment is excessive. his first duty is if there evidence of guilt, convict, act on the case. he
cannot acquit because there is evidence. it has to be proven. his next duty is to recommend that
if the penalty is excessive then the accused might be pardoned after a number of years or
granted parole.
as maybe deemed proper..?
what kind of felonies would this particular duty be observed?

NOTE: the court must exercise his duty in the second paragraph.
taking into consideration the degree of malice..what does that mean?BONUS QUESTION
it simply means, that there is no duty if the felony is not intentional(degree of malice). so if the
injury is culpa there is no need for the court to make that recommendation for clemency,
parole. there is no duty if culpable felony, the duty only resides if it is an intentional felony
because then the court would have to determine the degree of malice, so if the degree of
malice the court thinks is less, then he makes a recommendation for clemency or parole. if it is
excessive the court should no acquit the accused, it must consider the evidence first. If there is
evidence to convict, then it must convict the accused and make the recommendation.


ART. 7 -

after determining that it is a consummated felony.
light felonies - deemed punish when there are consummated
exemption lies to felonies against persons or property.

art 7 is related to art 9. 9 classifies the felonies based on gravity(penalties imposable)
NOTE: contend the penalties on the RPC specially those impose under special penal laws.

art 3 felonies classified based on intent or fault(culpable/intentional)

1. grave
2. less grave
3. light - infraction of law for the commission of which the penalty is aresto mayor(fine not
exceeding 200 pesos or both if provided)

scale of penalties & classification of felonies - art 25.
ART 7, 9, 26(categories)
ART 27 - aresto minor(1 day to 30 days) - light felony
100pesos not exceeding 200pesos - light felony
200 pesos - light felony(art 9), correctional penalty

how you would classify the penalty if fine is 200?
(art 26)less than 200 - light penalty

correctional penalty if it does not exceed 6000 but is not less than 200.
correctional (art 25)

*memorize the sequence. SEQUENCE of PENALTY
NOTE: each of these penalty assumes a specific position in the scale.
Example.
what is the penalty next lower in degree in the crime of homicide if the crime is frustrated?(look
at the scale and follow the sequence to RECLUSION TEMPORAL, which is the penalty for
HOMICIDE)
PRISION MAYOR.

correctional penalties(art 25).if you have the maximum period of the correctional penalty, that
is the starting point of describing it as a less grave felony.

correctional penalty:
1. prision correccional
2. arresto mayor
3. suspension
4. destiero
-each of these penalty have periods, so you have a
1. minimum
2. maximum
3. medium
for the purpose of identifying the less grave felony it starts with maximum period. penalties
which are in their maximum period are CORRECTIONAL.
LIGHT, CORRECTIONAL, AFFLICTIVE.

for the grave felonies then you look at the capital punishment that is death and also the
penalties that are afflicting.

NOTE: death is still found in the scale of penalties. although at present there is a law that
prohibits its imposition(RA 9346) - while it prohibits the imposition of death penalty, it does not
mean that the death penalty is abolish. what it only means that the courts cannot impose death
penalty - it is only downgraded/ reduced to the next penalty which is RECLUSION PERPETUA.
but with RA 9346, the penalty is the next door penalty(?) but the accused cannot be qualified to
avail of parole. there is no death penalty to be impose but it doesnt mean that death penalty is
already abolish.

NOTE: if you have formal crimes then you dont consider the stages because the crime is
committed by the act that is defined by the crime that is defined by the unlawful act. art 7 in
relation to art 9 in relation to art 25.

you have to identify what the affliction penalties are so that you will know that with this
afflicting penalties imposed then you have a grave felony. you need art 25 to consider what are
the correctional penalties and the light penalties, just to classify your felonies based on the
penalty impose.


classification base on:
1. gravity
2. penalty imposable

art 8 - basic rule on conspiracy and proposal to commit conspiracy.

CONSPIRACY IS NOT PUNISHED; CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT FELONY IS NOT PUNISHED AT
ALL(is not yet a crime, it is merely a conspiracy and a preparatory act; it is not an act of
execution, neither is it an external act that is related to the criminal purpose of the person).
PROPOSAL TO COMMIT A FELONY IS NOT A CRIME(preparatory act,only agreeing).
exemption:
1. when the law already provide for its punishment
example.
conspiracy to commit treason
conspiracy to commit rebellion

how do you define conspiracy?
2 or more person come together and agree to commit a crime.

NOTE: if a person decides to commit a crime and proposes the commission to the other, it is a
proposal to commit a felony - but only one person is the proponent. if the other person to
whom the felony proposed agrees then it has evolved into a conspiracy. it has graduated into
the level of a conspiracy.
will that make them liable already because it is a conspiracy?
no.

It is only when they do something express/manifest that you begin to relate the conspiracy for
committing a crime for the purpose of considering them equally, criminally liable. so,
conspiracy here becomes as a manner of incurring criminal liability so that conspirators are
equally liable, equal criminal responsibility.

How do you deal or how do you treat with that conspiracy to commit a felony?
it will be used to determine their criminal liability being equal. so if there is no proof that they
acted with conspiracy, their liability is not equal.(some would be principal, accomplice,
accessory) the liability is different

CONSPIRACY MUST BE PROVEN EQUALLY, CLEARY AS THE CHARGE ITSELF
so you have to prove the elements of homicide and prove that the accused conspired with each
other.

you need evidence other than proving the elements.
example.
prove the elements of homicide?
intentional killing.
identification of the accused/killer?
if proved, you need evidence to prove that accused acted in conspiracy with each other,
mutually agreed, their acts geared toward the same purpose that you can convince the court
that these accused acted with conspiracy with each other. if you're not able to do that then the
court will find them individually criminally liable only.

CONSPIRACY AS A MATTER OF INCURRING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
If it were the crime itself.
example.
conspiracy to commit treason.
(all you need to do is produce evidence on the agreement to commit treason. example. giving
aid and comfort to the enemy)

*aware of the principle if you are provided with situations, you can be able to identify if
conspiracy is present. its very easy if conspiracy were an anterior agreement(nagsabot sila
daan, somebody heard); consider close the evidence if it was just there in the scene of the
crime and you only have witnesses/ contend what happened and how the killing was
committed/performed but you dot have facts prior to, you are limited to the actual
commission of the crime - nothing less nothing more.you have to convince the court that
with that act, simultaneous and joint acts of the accused that they were one in purpose and
in desire. problem is when the crime is actually committed and you have to contend with
their joint action, simultaneous action, ascertain if there was unity in the purpose.

You might also like