New PPT Crim Law
New PPT Crim Law
New PPT Crim Law
GENERAL RULE: Penal laws cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it
was not punishable when committed.
EXCEPTION: (it may be applied retroactively) When the new law is favorable to the
accused.
2. Positivist Theory – basis of criminal liability is the sum of the social and economic
phenomena to which the actor is exposed wherein prevention and correction is the purpose of
penalty. This theory is exemplified in the provisions regarding impossible crimes and habitual
delinquency.
3. Eclectic or Mixed Theory – combination of positivist and classical thinking wherein crimes
that are economic and social in nature should be dealt in a positive manner; thus, the law is
more compassionate.
Republic Act No. 3815
Revised Penal Code of the Philippines
• Article 1. Time when Act takes effect. — This Code shall
take effect on the first day of January, nineteen hundred
and thirty-two.
• Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the
Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but
also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:
ART. 3 – FELONIES
Felonies – are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC.
• Mistake of Fact – is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person causing injury to
another. Such person is not criminally liable as he acted without criminal intent.
REASON FOR PUNSHING ACTS OF NEGLIGENCE: A man must use common sense and
exercise due reflection in all his acts; it is his duty to be cautious, careful and prudent.
ART. 4 – CRIMINAL LIABILITY
PAR. 1 - Criminal Liability for a felony different from that intended to be committed
REQUISITES: a) That an intentional felony has been committed.
b) That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed.
PROXIMATE CAUSE – that cause, which, in the natural and continuous sequence, unbroken
by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury without which the result would not have
occurred.
DESISTANCE - is an absolutory cause which negates criminal liability because the law
encourages a person to desist from committing a crime.
- this is applicable only in the attempted stage.
OVERT ACTS – Some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to commit a particular
crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its complete termination
following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles, nor by voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator will logically ripen into a concrete offense.
2 STAGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME:
1) Internal acts - Such as mere ideas in the mind of person.
Not punishable.
Light Felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated
EXCEPT: If committed against persons or property, punishable even if not
consummated.
Only principals and accomplices are liable, accessories are not liable even if committed
against persons or property.
ART. 8 – CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT FELONY
REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY
1. That 2 or more persons came to an agreement.
2. That the agreement pertains to the commission of a felony.
3. That the execution of the felony was decided upon.
2 CONCEPTS OF CONSPIRACY
1. Conspiracy as a crime by itself
EXAMPLE: conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection, treason, sedition.
2. Conspiracy as a means of committing a crime
a) There is a previous and express agreement;
b) The participants acted in concert or simultaneously which is indicative of a
meeting of the minds towards a common criminal objective. There is an implied agreement.
GENERAL RULE: Mere conspiracy or proposal to commit a felony is not punishable since they
are only preparatory acts
EXCEPTION: in cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor, such as in
treason, coup d’etat, and rebellion or insurrection
REQUISITES OF PROPOSAL:
1. That a person has decided to commit a felony; and
2. That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
ART. 9 – CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
ACCORDING TO GRAVITY
Importance of Classification
1. To determine whether these felonies can be complexed or not.
2. To determine the prescription of the crime and the prescription of the penalty.
• Grave felonies – are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties
which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art. 25 of the
Code.
• Less grave felonies – are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their
maximum period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of the Code.
• Light felonies – are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, is provided.
ART. 10 – OFFENSES NOT SUBJECT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF THE RPC
GENERAL RULE: RPC provisions are supplementary to special laws.
EXCEPTION:
1. Where the special law provides otherwise; and
2. When the provisions of the RPC are impossible of application, either by express
provision or by necessary implication.
Thus, when the special law adopts the penalties imposed in the RPC, such as reclusión
perpetua or reclusión temporal, the provisions of the RPC on imposition of penalties based on
stage of execution, degree of participation, and attendance of mitigating and aggravating
circumstances may be applied by necessary implication.
CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING
CRIMINAL LIABILITY
• Justifying Circumstances
• Exempting Circumstances
• Mitigating Circumstances
• Aggravating Circumstances
• Alternative Circumstances
ART. 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
• REQUISITES:
• a) Unlawful aggression (condition sine qua non);
• b) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it; and
• c) Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself.
• UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
- is equivalent to an actual physical assault or, at least
- threatened assault of an immediate and imminent kind which is offensive and positively
strong, showing the wrongful intent to cause injury.
• TEST OF REASONABLENESS – the means employed depends upon the nature and quality
of the (1) weapon used by the aggressor, and (2) his physical condition, character, size and
other circumstances, (3) and those of the person defending himself, (4) and also the place
and occasion of the assault.
• Perfect equality between the weapons used by the one defending himself and that of the
aggressor is not required, nor material commensurability between the means of attack and
defense.
• REASON: Because the person assaulted does not have sufficient tranquility of mind to think
and to calculate.
Rights included in self-defense:
• Self-defense includes not only the defense of the person or body of the one assaulted but
also that of his rights, the enjoyment of which is protected by law. Thus, it includes:
1. The right to honor. Hence, a slap on the face is considered as unlawful aggression directed
against the honor of the actor (People vs. Sabio, 19 SCRA 901).
2. The defense of property rights, only if there is also an actual and imminent danger on the
person of the one defending ( People vs Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389).
“Stand ground when in the right” - the law does not require a person to retreat when his
assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly weapon.
Under Republic Act 9262, known as the Anti- Violence against
Women and their Children Act of 2004:
• Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from Battered Woman
Syndrome do not incur any criminal or civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26, R.A. No.
9262)
• Battery – refers to any act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman or her child resulting to
physical and psychological or emotional distress.
2. DEFENSE OF RELATIVES
• REQUISITES:
• 1. Unlawful Aggression;
• 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
• 3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making the defense
had no part therein.
• 1. Unlawful Aggression;
• 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
• 3. The person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil motive.
4. AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR INJURY
• REQUISITES:
1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists:
2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; and
3. There be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.
• No civil liability except when there is another person benefited in which case the latter is the
one liable.
• Greater evil must not be brought about by the negligence or imprudence or violation of law
by the actor.
5. FULFILLMENT OF DUTY; OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT
OR OFFICE.
• REQUISITES:
• 1. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or
office;
• 2. That the injury caused or the offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due
performance of duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office.
6. OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR
SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE.
• REQUISITES:
1. That an order has been issued by a superior.
2. That such order must be for some lawful purpose
3. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful.
• Subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order if he is not aware of its illegality and
he is not negligent.
ART. 12. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES
• BASIS:
The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence of
intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the absence of negligence on the
part of the accused.
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE
1. It affects the act not the actor. 1. It affects the actor not the act.
• The defense must prove that the accused was insane at the time of the commission of the
crime because the presumption is always in favor of sanity.
• Insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act.
Mere abnormality of the mental faculties will not exclude imputability. The accused must be
"so insane as to be incapable of entertaining criminal intent." He must be deprived of reason
and acting without the least discernment because there is a complete absence of the power
to discern or a total deprivation of freedom of the will. (PEOPLE vs. ANTONIO, GR No.
144266, November 27, 2002)
2. PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE
• An infant under the age of nine years is absolutely and conclusively
presumed to be incapable of committing a crime.
• The phrase “under nine years” should be construed “nine years or less”
• Duress as a valid defense should be based on real, imminent, or reasonable fear for one’s
life or limb and should not be speculative, fanciful, or remote fear.
• “ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS” – An act done by me against my
will is not my act.
7. INSUPERABLE CAUSE.
INSUPERABLE CAUSE – some motive which has lawfully, morally or physically
prevented a person to do what the law commands.
ELEMENTS:
1. That an act is required by law to be done.
2. That a person fails to perform such act.
3. That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or insuperable cause.
Examples:
a. The municipal president detained the offended party for three days because to take him to
the nearest justice of the peace required a journey for three days by boat as there was no other
means of transportation. (US vs. Vicentillo, 19 Phil. 118)
• The distance which required a journey for three days was considered an insuperable cause.
• Note: Under the law, the person arrested must be delivered to the nearest judicial authority
at most within 18 hours (now 36 hours, Art. 125 RPC); otherwise, the public officer will be
liable for arbitrary detention.
b. A mother who at the time of childbirth was overcome by severe dizziness and extreme
debility, and left the child in a thicket were said child died, is not liable for infanticide because it
was physically impossible for her to take home the child. (People vs. Bandian, 63 Phil. 530).
The severe dizziness and extreme debility of the woman constitute an insuperable cause.
• ABSOLUTORY CAUSES - are those where the act committed is a crime but
for reasons of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.
ENTRAPMENT INSTIGATION
1. Ways and means are resorted to for 1. Instigator induces the would be
the capture of lawbreaker in the accused to commit the crime, hence he
execution of his criminal plan. becomes a co-principal.
2. not a bar to the prosecution and 2. it will result in the acquittal of the
conviction of the lawbreaker accused.
ART.13 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES – those which if present in the commission of
the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability but serve only to
reduce the penalty.
• One single fact cannot be made the basis of more than one mitigating
circumstance. Hence, a mitigating circumstance arising from a single fact,
absorbs all the other mitigating circumstances arising from the same fact.
• Applies, when all the requisites necessary to justify the act are not attendant.
• But in the case of “incomplete self defense, defense of relatives, and defense
of a stranger”, unlawful aggression must be present, it being an indispensable
requisite.
2. UNDER 18, OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD
It is the age of the accused at the time of the commission of the crime which should be
determined. His age at the time of the trial is immaterial.
• REQUISITES:
1. The provocation must be sufficient.
2. It must originate from the offended party.
3. The provocation must be immediate to the commission of the crime by
the person who is provoked.
• The threat should not be offensive and positively strong. Otherwise, the
threat to inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression, which may give rise to
self-defense.
5. VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE
• REQUISITES:
1. That there be a grave offense done to the one committing the felony,
his spouse, ascendants; descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degrees;
2. That the felony is committed in immediate vindication of such grave
offense.
1. It is made directly only to the person 1. The grave offense may be committed
committing the felony. also against the offender’s relatives
mentioned by law.
2. The cause that brought about the 2. The offended party must have done a
provocation need not be a grave grave offense to the offender or his
offense. relatives mentioned by law.
• BASIS: Loss of reasoning and self control, thereby diminishing the exercise of his
will power.
WHEN PASSION OR OBFUSCATION NOT MITIGATING:
When committed:
1. In the spirit of lawlessness, or
2. In a spirit of revenge
PASSION/ PROVOCATION
OBFUSCATION
• BASIS: They are based on the greater perversity of the offender manifested
in the commission of the felony as shown by:
1. the motivating power itself,
2. the place of the commission,
3. the means and ways employed
4. the time, or
5. the personal circumstances of the offender, or the offended party.
KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. Generic – those which apply to all crimes, such as:
a) Advantage taken of public position;
b) Contempt or insult of public authorities;
c) Crime committed in the dwelling of the offended party;
d) Abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness;
e) Place where crime is committed;
f) Nighttime, uninhabited place, or band;
g) Recidivism (reincidencia);
h) Habituality (reiteracion);
i) Craft, fraud or disguise;
j) Unlawful entry;
k) Breaking of parts of the house;
l) Use of persons under 15 years of age.
2. Specific – those which apply only to specific crimes, such as ignominy in
crimes against chastity and cruelty and treachery which are applicable only to
crimes against persons.
a) Disregard of rank, age or sex due the offended party;
b) Abuse of superior strength or means be employed to weaken the
defense;
c) Treachery (alevosia);
d) Ignominy;
e) Cruelty;
f) Use of unlicensed firearm in the murder or homicide committed
therewith (RA 8294).
3. Qualifying – those that change the nature of the crime.
a) Alevosia (treachery) or evident premeditation qualifies the killing of a person
to murder.
b) Art. 248 enumerates the qualifying aggravating circumstances which quality
the killing of person to murder.
As to its effect
Increases the penalty which should be To give the crime its proper and
imposed upon the accused to the exclusive name and to place the author
maximum period but without exceeding thereof in such a situation as to deserve
the limit prescribed by law. no other penalty than that specially
prescribed by law for said crime.
• Public authority – sometimes also called a person in authority, is a public officer who is
directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the power to govern and
execute the laws; like a mayor, councilor, governor, barangay captain and barangay
chairman.
A teacher or professor of a public or recognized private school is not a “public authority within the
contemplation of this paragraph. While he is a person in authority under Art. 152, that status is only
for purposes of Art. 148 (direct assault) and Art. 152 (resistance and disobedience).
Par. 3 – That the act be committed (1) with insult or in disregard of the respect due the
offended party on account of his (a) rank, (b) age, or (c) sex, or
(2) that it be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not given
provocation.
• The four circumstances enumerated should be considered as one aggravating circumstance only.
• Disregard of rank, age or sex is essentially applicable only to crimes against person or honor.
They are not taken into account in crimes against property.
• To be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance, there must be evidence that in the
commission of the crime, the offender deliberately intended to offend or insult the sex, age and
rank of the offended party.
• Rank of the offended party – is the designation or title of distinction used to fix the relative position
of the offended party in reference to others.
- there must be a difference in the social condition of the offender and the offended party.
• Age of the offended party – may refer to old age or the tender age of the victim.
• Sex of the offended party – refers to the female sex, not to the male sex.
• Dwelling – must be a building or structure, exclusively used for rest and comfort. A
“combination of a house and a store” or a market stall where the victim slept is not a dwelling.
- dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of the staircase and enclosure under the
house.
• The aggravating circumstance of dwelling requires that the crime be wholly or partly committed
therein or in any integral part thereof.
• Dwelling does not mean the permanent residence or domicile of the offended party or that he
must be the owner thereof. He must, however, be actually living or dwelling therein even for a
temporary duration or purpose.
• It is not necessary that the accused should have actually entered the dwelling of the victim to
commit the offense; it is enough that the victim was attacked inside his own house, although
the assailant may have devised means to perpetrate the assault from without.
DWELLING IS NOT AGGRAVATING IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:
1. When both the offender and the offended party are occupants of the same house,
and this is true even if offender is a servant in the house.
• EXCEPTION: In case of adultery in the conjugal dwelling, the same is aggravating.
However, if the paramour also dwells in the conjugal dwelling, the applicable
aggravating circumstance is abuse of confidence.
2. When robbery is committed by the use of force upon things, dwelling is not
aggravating because it is inherent. But dwelling is aggravating in robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons because this class of robbery can be committed
without the necessity of trespassing the sanctity of the offended party’s house.
3. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent or included by law in defining the
crime.
4. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediate provocation.
There must exist a close relation between the provocation made by the victim and
the commission of the crime by the accused.
5. The victim is not a dweller of the house.
Par. 4. – That the act be committed with
(1) abuse of confidence or
(2) obvious ungratefulness.
• Abuse of confidence is inherent in malversation (Art. 217), qualified theft (Art. 310), estafa by
conversion or misappropriation (Art. 315), and qualified seduction (Art. 337).
• The ungratefulness contemplated by par. 4 must be such clear and manifest ingratitude on
the part of the accused.
Par. 5 – That the crime be committed
(1) in the palace of the Chief Executive, or in his presence, or
(2) where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, or
(3) in a place dedicated to religious worship.
Except for the third which requires that official functions are being performed at the time of the
commission of the crime, the other places mentioned are aggravating per se even if no official
duties or acts of religious worship are being conducted there.
Cemeteries, however respectable they may be, are not considered as place dedicated to the
worship of God.
Par. 6. – That the crime be committed
(1) in the nighttime, or
(2) in an uninhabited place, or
(3) by a band, whenever such circumstance may facilitate the commission of the offense.
• When present in the same case and their element are distinctly palpable and can subsist
independently, they shall be considered separately.
• Nighttime (obscuridad) – that period of darkness beginning at end of dusk and ending at
dawn. Nights are from sunset to sunrise.
• It is necessary that the commission of the crime was begun and completed at nighttime.
• When the place of the crime is illuminated by light, nighttime is not aggravating.
• Uninhabited place (despoblado) – one where there are no houses at all; a place at a
considerable distance from town, or where the houses are scattered at a great distance from
each other.
• What actually determines whether this aggravating circumstance should be considered
against the accused, aside from the distance and isolation of the place, is the reasonable
possibility of the victim receiving or securing aid from third persons.
• Band (en cuadrilla) – whenever more than three (i.e., at least four) armed malefactors shall
have acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed committed by a
band.
Par. 7 – That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
• REQUISITES:
1. That armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly.
2. That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the
crime was committed.
• This aggravating circumstance requires that the armed men are accomplices who take part
in that minor capacity directly or indirectly, and not when they were merely present at the
crime scene. Neither should they constitute a band, for then the proper aggravating
circumstance would be cuadrilla.
Par. 9 – That the accused is a recidivist.
REQUISITES:
1. That the offender is on trial for an offense;
2. That he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime;
3. That both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same title of the Code;
4. That the offender is convicted of the new offense.
When this aggravating circumstance is present, there must be two or more principals, the one
who gave or offered the price or promise and the one who accepted it, both of whom
are principals.
If without previous promise it was given voluntarily after the crime had been committed as an
expression of his appreciation for the sympathy and aid shown by the other accused, it should
not be taken into consideration for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
The price, reward or promise need not consist of or refer to material things or that the same
were actually delivered, it being sufficient that the offer made by the principal by inducement be
accepted by the principal by direct participation before the commission of the offense.
Par. 12 – That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
stranding of a vessel or intentional damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of
any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
When another aggravating circumstance already qualifies the crime, any of these
aggravating circumstances shall be considered as generic aggravating circumstance only.
A killing committed through any of these qualifies the crime to murder, except if arson was
resorted to but without intent to kill, in view of P.D. 1613 which provides a specific penalty for
that situation.
Par. 13 – That the act be committed with evident premeditation
REQUISITES:
The prosecution must prove –
1. The time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination; and
3. A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution, to allow him to reflect
upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his
will.
To establish evident premeditation, it must be shown that there was a period sufficient to
afford full opportunity for meditation and reflection, a time adequate to allow the conscience to
overcome the resolution of the will, as well as outward acts showing the intent to kill. It must be
shown that the offender had sufficient time to reflect upon the consequences of his act but still
persisted in his determination to commit the crime. (PEOPLE vs. SILVA, et. al., GR No. 140871,
August 8, 2002)
Par. 14 – That (1) craft, (2) fraud, or (3) disguise be employed
• Craft (astucia) – involved the use of intellectual trickery or cunning on the part of the accused.
- it is a chicanery resorted to by the accused to aid in the execution of his criminal design. It is
employed as a scheme in the execution of the crime.
• Fraud (fraude) – insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner
which would enable the offender to carry out his design.
For instance:
In People vs. San Pedro (Jan. 22, 1980), where the accused pretended to hire the driver in order to
get his vehicle, it was held that there was craft directed to the theft of the vehicle, separate from the
means subsequently used to treacherously kill the defenseless driver.
In People vs. Masilang (July 11, 1986) there was also craft where after hitching a ride, the accused
requested the driver to take them to a place to visit somebody, when in fact they had already planned
to kill the driver.
• Disguise (disfraz) – resorting to any device to conceal identity.
Par. 15 – That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or (2) means be employed to
weaken the defense.
Par. 15 enunciates two aggravating circumstances, namely, that advantage was taken of
superior strength, or that means were employed by the offender to weaken the defense of the
victim, either of which qualifies a killing to murder.
This circumstance is applicable only to crimes against persons, and sometimes against
person and property, such as robbery with physical injuries or homicide.
• Par. 16 – That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
• Treachery (alevosia) – is present when the offender commits any of the crimes against
person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and
specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the
offended party might make.
• REQUISITES OF TREACHERY:
1. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself; and
2. That the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or form of attack
employed by him.
The test of treachery is not only the relative position of the parties but, more specifically,
whether or not the victim was forewarned or afforded the opportunity to make a defense or to
ward off the attack.
Par. 17 – That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the
natural effects of the act.
• Ignominy – is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which adds disgrace and obloquy
to the material injury caused by the crime.
• Unlawful entry – when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose.
Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and not for escape.
REASON FOR AGGRAVATION: One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men to
guard their property and provide for their personal safety, shows a greater perversity, a greater
audacity; hence, the law punishes him with more severity.
Par. 19 – That as a means to the commission of a crime, a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be
broken.
• This circumstance is aggravating only in those cases where the offender resorted to any of
said means to enterthe house. If the wall, etc., is broken in order to get out of the place, it is
not an aggravating circumstance.
• If the offender broke a window to enable himself to reach a purse with money on the table
near that window, which he took while his body was outside of the building, the crime of theft
was attended by this aggravating circumstance. It is not necessary that the offender should
have entered the building.
Par. 20 – That the crime be committed (1) with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age, or
(2) by means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar means.
• Cruelty – there is cruelty when the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim suffer
slowly and gradually, causing unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal
act.
• REQUISITES OF CRUELTY:
1. That the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong;
2. That the other wrong be unnecessaryfor the execution of the purpose of the offender.
Cruelty is not inherent in crimes against persons. In order for it to be appreciated, there must
be positive proof that the wounds found on the body of the victim were inflicted while he was still
alive in order unnecessarily to prolong physical suffering.
If the victim was already dead when the acts of mutilation were being performed, this would
also qualify the killing to murder due to outraging of his corpse.
• Unlike mitigating circumstances (par. 10,
Art. 13), there is no provision for
aggravating circumstances of a similar or
analogous character.
ART. 15 – ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
• Alternative circumstances – are those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating
or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions
attending its commission.
• BASIS: The nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions attending its
commission.
3. In crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness (Art. 336), relationship is always
aggravating, regardless of whether the offender is a relative of a higher or lower degree of the
offended party.
• When the qualification given to the crime is derived from the relationship between the
offender and the offended party, it is neither mitigating nor aggravating, because it is
inseparable from and inherent in the offense. (e.g. parricide, adultery and concubinage).
• WHEN INTOXICATION MITIGATING AND WHEN AGGRAVATING:
1. Mitigating –
i. If intoxication is not habitual, or
ii. If intoxication is not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony.
2. Aggravating –
i. If intoxication is habitual, or
ii. If it is intentional (subsequent to the plan to commit a felony).
REQUISITES:
1. That they participated in the criminal resolution; and
2. That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which
directly tended to the same end.
REQUISITES
1. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the
crime; and
2. That such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the
material executor.
• One cannot be held guilty of having instigated the commission of the crime without first being
shown that the crime was actually committed (or attempted) by another. Thus, there can be
no principal by inducement (or by indispensable cooperation) unless there is a principal by
direct participation. But there can be a principal by direct participation without a principal by
inducement (or by indispensable cooperation).
TWO WAYS OF BECOMING PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION:
1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime by –
a) Using irresistible force.
b) Causing uncontrollable fear.
• In these cases, there is no conspiracy, not even a unity of criminal purpose and intention.
• Only the one using the force or causing the fear is criminally liable. The material executor is
not criminally liable because of Art. 12, pars. 5 and 6 (exempting circumstances)
REQUISITES:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there is either anterior conspiracy or unity
of criminal purpose and intention immediately before the commission of the crime charged; and
2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act, without which it
would not have been accomplished.
REQUISITES:
1. That there be community of design; that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by
direct participation, he concurs with the latter his purpose;
2. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the
intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way;
and
3. That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the
person charged as an accomplice.
• Before there could be an accomplice, there must be a principal by direct participation.
• The person charged as an accomplice should not have inflicted a mortal wound. If he
inflicted a mortal wound, he becomes a principal by direct participation.
• In profiting by the effects of the crime, the accessory must receive the property from the
principal. He should not take it without the consent of the principal. If he took it without the
consent of the principal, he is not an accessory but a principal in the crime of theft.
TWO CLASSES OF ACCESSORIES CONTEMPLATED IN PAR. 3 OF ART. 19
a) Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of any crime (not
light felony) with abuse of his public functions.
Requisites:
1. The accessory is a public officer.
2. He harbors, conceals, or assists in the escape of the principal.
3. The public officer acts with abuse of his public functions.
4. The crime committed by the principal is any crime, provided it is not a light felony.
b) Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the author of the crime who is
guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or attempts against the life of the President, or who is known
to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
Requisites:
1. The accessory is a private person.
2. He harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of the author of the crime.
3. The crime committed by the principal is either:
i. Treason,
ii. Parricide,
iii. Murder,
iv. An attempt against the life of the President, or
v. That the principal is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
• Where the alleged principal is acquitted, it is neither proper nor possible to convict the
defendant as an accessory. The responsibility of the accessory is subordinate to that of the
principal in a crime
• Neither the letter nor the spirit of the law requires that the principal be convicted before one
may be punished as an accessory. As long as the corpus delicti is proved and the
accessory’s participation as such is shown, he can be held criminally responsible and meted
out the corresponding penalty (Inovero vs. Coronel, CA, 65 O.G. 3160).
• The prescribed acts of the accessory under par. 2 must have been intended to prevent the
discovery of the crime, hence, mere silence does not make one an accessory. If, however,
the crime involved is a conspiracy to commit treason, his silence may hold him liable for
misprision of treason (Art. 116) but as a principal thereof.
• Where the accused misleads the authorities by giving them false information, such act is
equivalent to concealment and he should be held as an accessory.
• Anti-Fencing Law of 1979 Pres. Decree 1612
Fencing – is an act, with intent to gain, of buying, selling, receiving, possessing, keeping, or in
any other manner dealing in anything of value which a person knows or should have known to
be derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
Fence – is a person who commits the act of fencing. A fence who receives stolen property as
above-provided is not an accessory but a principal in the crime defined in and punished by the
Anti_x0002_Fencing Law.
• Mere possession of anything of value which has been the subject of robbery or theft shall be
prima facie evidence of fencing.
ART. 20 – ACCESSORIES WHO ARE EXEMPT FROM
CRIMINAL LIABLITY
• The exemption provided for in this article is based on the ties of blood and the preservation
of the cleanliness of one’s name, which compels one to conceal crimes committed by
relatives so near as those mentioned in this article.
REASON: Because such acts are prompted not by affection but by a detestable greed.
P.D. 1829 penalizes the act of any person who knowingly or willfully obstructs, impedes,
frustrates or delays the apprehension of suspects and the investigation and prosecution of
criminal cases.
The benefits of the exception in Art. 20 do not apply to PD 1829.
TITILE THREE: PENALTIES
Chapter One: Penalties in General (Arts. 21-24)
• Penalty – is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of the law.
REASON: Because a law cannot be rationally obeyed unless it is first shown, and a
man cannot be expected to obey an order that has not been given.
ART. 22 – RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF PENAL LAWS
• Habitual delinquent – a person who, within a period of ten years from the date of his release
or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft,
estafa, or falsification, is found guilty of any said crimes a third time or oftener.
ART. 23- EFFECT OF PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY
GENERAL RULE – Pardon by the offended party does not extinguish the criminal liability of the
offender.
REASON: A crime committed is an offense against the State. Only the Chief Executive can pardon the
offenders.
EXCEPTION - Pardon by the offended party will bar criminal prosecution in the following
crimes:
a. Adultery and Concubinage (Art. 344, RPC)
– EXPRESS or IMPLIED pardon must be given by offended party to BOTH offenders.
- Pardon must be given PRIOR to institution of criminal action.
b. Seduction, Abduction, Acts of Lasciviousness (Art. 344, RPC)
– EXPRESS pardon given by offended party or her parents or grandparents or guardian
- Pardon must be given PRIOR to the institution of the criminal action. However, marriage
between the offender and the offended party EVEN AFTER the institution of the criminal action
or conviction of the offender will extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already
imposed against the offender, his co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact.
c. Rape (as amended by R.A. 8353)
- The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall
extinguish criminal liability or the penalty imposed. In case the legal husband is the offender,
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as offended party shall also produce the same effect.
• Pardon by the offended party under Art. 344 is ONLY A BAR to criminal prosecution; it is
NOT a ground for extinguishment of criminal liability. Nevertheless, civil liability may be
extinguished by the EXRESS WAIVER of the offended party.
ART. 24 – MEASURES OF PREVENTION OR SAFETY WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED
PENALTIES
1. Because they are not imposed as a result of judicial proceedings. Those mentioned
in paragraphs 1, 3 and 4 are merely preventive measures before conviction of
offenders.
This article determines the classification of a fine whether imposed as a single or as an alternative penalty for
a crime.
The rule herein does not apply where the fine involved is in a compound penalty, that is, it is imposed in
conjunction with another penalty.
Where the fine in question is exactly P200, under Art. 9 it is a light felony, hence the felony involved is a light
felony; whereas under Art. 26, it is a correctional penalty, hence the offense involved is a less grave felony. It
has been held that this discrepancy should be resolved liberally in favor of the accused, hence Art. 9 prevails
over Art. 26 (People vs. Yu Hai, 99 Phil. 725).
HOWEVER, according to Justice Regalado there is no such discrepancy. What is really in issue is the
prescription of the offense vis-a-visthe prescription of the penalty, the former being the forfeiture of the right of
the State to prosecute the offender and the latter being the loss of its power to enforce the judgment against
the convict.
Chapter Three: Duration and Effects of Penalties (Arts. 27-45)
Section One – Duration of Penalties
1. When the offender is in prison – the duration of temporary penalties is from the day on which
the judgment of conviction becomes final.
2. When the offender is not in prison – the duration of penalties consisting in deprivation of
liberty, is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty.
3. The duration of other penalties – the duration is from the day on which the offender
commences to serve his sentence.
ART. 29 – PERIOD OF PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT DEDUCTED FROM TERM OF
IMPRISONMENT
• These rules on preventive imprisonment apply to all sentences regardless of the duration
thereof, including the so-called perpetual penalties as long as they involve deprivation of
liberty. It applies to destierro.
• When is the detention prisoner entitled to the full credit of his preventive imprisonment?
If the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules
imposed upon convicted prisoners.
• When will he be credited only with four fifths the time during which he has undergone
preventive imprisonment?
If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed
upon convicted prisoners.
• The following offenders are not entitled to be credited with the full time or four- fifths of the
time of preventive imprisonment:
1. A pardon shall not restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage.
EXCEPTION: When any or both such rights is/are expressly restored by the terms of the
pardon.
2. It shall not exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil liability.
Are chargeable to the accused only in cases of conviction. In case of acquittal, the costs are
de oficio, meaning each party bearing his own expenses.
The payment of costs is a matter that rests entirely upon the discretion of courts.
ART. 38 - PECUNIARY LIABILITIES
Subsidiary penalty shall be proper only if the accused has no property with which to
pay the fine, and not as a matter of choice on his part by opting to go to jail instead of
paying.
Subsidiary penalty is not an accessory penalty, hence it must be specifically imposed
by the court in its judgment, otherwise the accused cannot be made to serve the
corresponding subsidiary imprisonment.
RULES AS TO SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
1. If the penalty imposed is prisión correccional or arresto and fine –subsidiary imprisonment is
not to exceed 1/3 of the term of the sentence, and in no case to continue for more than one
year. Fraction or part of a day, not counted.
2. When the penalty imposed is fine only – subsidiary imprisonment
a) not to exceed 6 months – if the culprit is prosecuted for grave or less grave felony,
and
b) not to exceed 15 days – if prosecuted for light felony.
3. When the penalty imposed is higher than prisión correccional – no subsidiary imprisonment.
4. If the penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement, but of fixed duration – subsidiary
penalty shall consist in the same deprivations as those of the principal penalty, under the same
rules as nos. 1, 2 and 3 above.
5. In case the financial circumstances of the convict should improve, he shall pay the fine,
notwithstanding the fact that the convict suffered subsidiary personal liability therefor.
When the penalty prescribed for the offense is imprisonment, it is the penalty actually
imposed by the Court, not the penalty provided for by the Code, which should be considered in
determining whether or not subsidiary penalty should be imposed.
NO SUBSIDIARY PENALTY SHALL BE IMPOSED WHERE:
1. The penalty imposed is higher than prisión correccional or 6 years,
Additional penalty for habitual delinquency should be included in determining whether or not
subsidiary penalty should be imposed.
2. For non-payment of reparation or indemnification,
3. For non-payment of costs, and
4. Where the penalty imposed is a fine and another penalty without fixed duration, like censure.
The rules on subsidiary penalty in Art. 39 are applicable to crimes punishable by special laws by
force of Art. 10 of the Code.
Section Three – Penalties in which other accessory penalties are inherent
5. Arresto – suspension of the right to hold office and the right of suffrage during the term of the
sentence.
The Code does not provide for any accessory penalty for destierro.
RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT
The confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds and instruments of a crime is an accessory
penalty.
• The provisions of Art. 45 cannot apply when
1. The instruments belong to innocent third parties,
2. Such properties have not been placed under the jurisdiction of the court, and
3. When it is legally or physically impossible.
GENERAL RULE: The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be imposed upon the
principals for a consummated felony.
EXCEPT: When the penalty to be imposed upon the principal in frustrated or attempted felony is
fixed by law.
GRADUATION OF PENALTIES
1. BY DEGREES – refers to
a) the stages of execution (consummated, frustrated, or attempted); and
b) the degree of the criminal participation of the offender (whether as principal, accomplice or
accessory).
2. BY PERIODS – refers to the proper period of the penalty which should be imposed when
aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime.
ART. 47 CASES WHEREIN THE DEATH PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED
1. UNDER AGE. When the offender is below 18 years of age at the time of the
commission of the crime.
2. OVER AGE. When the guilty person is more than seventy (70) years of age.
3. NO COURT MAJORITY. When upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the
Supreme Court, the vote of eight members is not obtained for the imposition of the death
penalty.
Automatic review is available only in cases where death penalty is imposed (R.A. 7659).
ART. 48 COMPLEX CRIMES
CONCEPT:
1. In complex crime, although 2 or more crimes are actually committed, they constitute only one
crime in the eyes of the law as well as in the conscience of the offender.
2. The offender has only one criminal intent, hence there is only one penaltyimposed for the
commission of a complex crime.
TWO KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES:
1. COMPOUND CRIME (delito compuesto) – a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less
grave felonies.
REQUISITES:
1. That only a single act is performed by the offender;
2. That the single act produces: (1) two or more grave felonies, or (2) one or more grave
and one or more less grave felonies.
Art. 48 does not apply when the law provides one single penalty for special complex crime.
These include –
• Robbery with Homicide
• Robbery with Rape
• Rape with Homicide
• Kidnapping with Serious
• Physical Injuries
• Kidnapping with Homicide or
• Murder
The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime, the same to be
applied in its maximum period.
If different crimes resulting from one single act are punished with the same penalty, the
penalty for any one of them shall be imposed, the same to be applied in the maximum
period.
Art. 48 applies to crimes through negligence. E.g.: offender found guilty of a complex crime
of homicide with less serious physical injuries through reckless imprudence.
When 2 felonies constituting a complex crime are punishable by imprisonment and fine,
respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment should be imposed. REASON: fine is not
included in the list of penalties in the order of severity, and it is the last in the graduated
scales in Art. 71 of the RPC.
Plurality of Crimes- consists in the successive execution, by the same individual, of different
criminal acts, upon any of which no conviction has yet been declared.
KINDS:
1. FORMAL OR IDEAL PLURALITY- only ONE CRIMINAL LIABILITY.
CONTINUING CRIME – is a single crime, consisting of a series of acts, but all arising from
ONE CRIMINAL RESOLUTION; length of time in the commission is immaterial.
ART. 49 PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED UPON THE PRINCIPALS WHEN THE CRIME
COMMITTED IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED
RULES:
1. If the penalty for the felony committed be higher than the penalty for the offense which the
accused intended to commit, the lower penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period.
2. If the penalty for the felony committed be lower than the penalty for the offense which the
accused intended to commit, the lower penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period.
3. If the act committed also constitutes an attempt or frustration of another crime, and the law
prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter, the penalty for the attempted or frustrated
crime shall be imposed in its maximum period.
ART. 59. PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IN CASE OF FAILURE TO COMMIT THE CRIME
BECAUSE THE MEANS EMPLOYED OR THE AIMS SOUGHT ARE IMPOSSIBLE
The penalty for impossible crime is Arresto Mayor (imprisonment of 1 mo and 1 day to 6
mos) or fine ranging from 200-500pesos.
EFFECTS:
1. Aggravating circumstances (generic and specific) have the effect of increasing the
penalty, without however exceeding the maximum period provided by law.
2. Mitigating circumstances have the effect of diminishing the penalty.
3. Habitual delinquency has the effect, not only of increasing the penalty because of
recidivism which is generally implied in habitual delinquency, but also of imposing an
additional penalty.
REQUISITES OF HABITUAL DELIQUENCY:
1. that the offender had been convicted of any of the crimes of serious or less
serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification.
2. that after conviction or after serving his sentence, he again committed, and, within
10 years from his last release of first conviction, he was again convicted of any of
the said crimes for the second time.
3. that after his conviction of, or after serving sentence for the second offense, he
again committed, and, within 10 years from his last release or last conviction, he
was again convicted of any of said offenses, the third time or oftener.
Habituality distinguished from recidivism
HABITUAL DELIQUENCY RECIDIVISM
As to the CRIMES committed
The crimes are specified It is sufficient that the accused on the date of his trial,
shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title.
As to the PERIOD of time the crimes are committed
The offender is found guilty within ten No period of time between the former conviction and
years from his last release or last the last conviction.
conviction.
As to the NUMBER of crimes committed
The accused must be found guilty the third time The second offense is for an offense found in the
or oftener of the crimes specified. same title.
As to their EFFECTS
An additional penalty is also imposed If not offset by a mitigating circumstance,
serves to increase the penalty only to
the maximum
• ART. 63 RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES
This article is applicable when the minor’s application for suspension of sentence is
DISAPPROVED or if while in the reformatory institution he becomes INCORRIGIBLE, in
which case he shall be returned to the court for the imposition of the proper penalty.
ART. 70. SUCCESSIVE SERVICE OF SENTENCE
BUT when there is a privileged mitigating circumstance, so that the penalty has to be lowered
by one degree, the STARTING POINT for determining the minimum term of the indeterminate
penalty is the penalty next lower than that prescribed by the Code for the offense.
II. IF THE PENALTY IS IMPOSED BY SPECIAL PENAL LAW
a) The Maximum Term – must not exceed the maximum term fixed by said law.
b) The Minimum Term – must not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the same.
For SPECIAL LAWS, it is anything within the inclusive range of the prescribed penalty. Courts
are given discretion in the imposition of the indeterminate penalty. Theaggravating and
mitigating circumstances are not considered unless the special law adopts the same
terminology for penalties as those used in the RPC (such as reclusión perpetua and the like).
B. WHEN BENEFIT OF THE ISL IS NOT APPLICABLE:
The Indeterminate Sentence Law shall not apply to the following persons:
1. sentenced to death penalty or life imprisonment
2. treason, or conspiracy or proposal to commit treason
3. misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage
4. piracy
5. habitual delinquents
6. escaped from confinement, or evaded sentence
7. granted with conditional pardon by the President, but violated the terms thereof
8. maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed 1 year
9. sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension only
The minimum and maximum terms in the IS must be fixed, because they are the basis for the
following:
1. Whenever a prisoner has: (a) served the MINIMUM penalty imposed on him, and (b) is fit for
release of the prisoner on parole, upon terms and conditions prescribed by the Board.
2. But when the paroled prisoner violates any of the conditions of his parole during the period of
surveillance, he may be rearrested to serve the remaining unexpired portion of the MAXIMUM
sentence.
3. Even if a prisoner has already served the MINIMUM, but he is not fitted for release on the
parole, he shall continue to serve until the end of the MAXIMUM term.
• PROBATION LAW OF 1976(PD 968, AS AMENDED)
A. CONCEPT
PROBATION is a disposition under which a defendant after conviction and sentence is
released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation officer.
B. APPLICATION
This shall apply to all offenders except those entitled to benefits under PD 603 and similar
laws.
C. RULES ON GRANT OF PROBATION
1. After having convicted and sentenced a defendant, the trial court MAY SUSPEND the
execution of thesentence, and place the defendant on probation, upon APPLICATION by
the defendant within the period for perfecting an appeal.
2. Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposed a term of imprisonment or
fine only.
3. NO application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has
PERFECTED AN APPEAL from the judgment of conviction.
4. Filing of application for probation operates as a WAIVER OF THE RIGHT TO APPEAL.
5. The application shall be filed with the trial court, and the order granting ordenying
probation shall NOT BE APPEALABLE.
6. Accessory penalties are deemed suspended once probation is granted.
D. POST-SENTENCE INVESTIGATION
The convict is not immediately placed on probation. There shall be a prior investigation by
the probation officer and a determination by the court.
2. In all other cases, if he is sentenced to more than one year, said period shall not exceed 6
years.
3. When the sentence imposes a fine only and the offender is made to serve subsidiary
imprisonment. The period of probation shall be twice the total number of days of subsidiary
imprisonment.
J. ARREST OF PROBATIONER AND SUBSEQUENT DISPOSITIONS
1. At any time during probation, the court may issue a warrant for the ARREST of a probationer for
any serious violation of the conditions of probation.
2. If violation is established, the court may (a) REVOKE his probation, or (b) continue his probation
and MODIFY the conditions thereof. This order is not appealable.
3. If revoked, the probationer shall SERVE the sentence originally imposed.
K. TERMINATION OF PROBATION
The court may order the final discharge of the probationer upon finding that, he has fulfilled the
terms and conditions of his probation.
PARDON – is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the execution of the
laws, which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law
inflicts for the crime he has committed.
Prescription of the crime – is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the
offender, after the lapse of a certain time.
ELEMENTS
1. That the penalty is imposed by final judgment
2. That the convict evaded the service of his sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence
3. The convict who escape from prison has not given himself up, or been captured, or gone to a
foreign country
4. That the penalty has prescribed because of the lapse of time from the date of the evasion of
service of the sentence by the convict.
Chapter Two: Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability (Arts. 94-99)
ART. 94. PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
EFFECT OF ACQUITTAL
Extinction of the penal action does NOT carry with it extinction of the civil; UNLESS the
extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil
liability might arise did not exist. (See Section 1, Rule 111 of the 2000 Rules on Criminal
Procedure. Civil liability arising from other sources of obligations is not impliedly instituted with
the criminal action).
• EFFECT OF DISMISSAL OF CASE
The dismissal of the information or the criminal action does NOT affect the right of the
offended party to institute or continue the civil action already instituted arising from the offense,
because such dismissal or extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of
the civil action.
In all these cases, civil liability from sources other than delict are not extinguished.
ART. 101. RULES REGARDING CIVIL LIABILITY IN CERTAIN CASES
- Civil liability is still imposed in cases falling under exempting circumstances
EXCEPT:
1. No civil liability in paragraph 4 of Art. 12 which provides for injury caused by mere accident.
2. No civil liability in paragraph 7 of Art. 12 which provides for failure to perform an act required
by law when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause.
- No civil liability is imposed in cases falling under justifying circumstances EXCEPT: under
paragraph 4, where a person does an act, causing damage to another, in order to avoid evil or
injury, the person benefited by the prevention of the evil or injury shall be civilly liable in
proportion to the benefit he received.
ART. 102. SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS, TAVERNKEEPERS, AND PROPRIETORS
OF ESTABLISHMENTS
• ELEMENTS UNDER PARAGRAPH 1
1. That the innkeeper, tavernkeeper or proprietor of establishment or his employee committed a
violation of municipal ordinance or some general or special police regulation.
2. That the crime is committed in such inn, tavern or establishment.
3. That the person criminally liable is insolvent.
Concurrence of all elements makes the innkeeper, tavernkeeper, or proprietor civilly liable for
the crime committed in his establishment.