PENALTIES Complex Crime vs.

Compound Crime (2004) Distinguish clearly but briefly: Between compound and complex crimes as concepts in the Penal Code. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: C&'P&U#D C%(' S result when the offender committed only a single felonious act from which two or more crimes resulted. !his is pro)ided for in modified form in the first part of "rticle *+, %e)ised Penal Code, limiting the resulting crimes to only gra)e and-or less gra)e felonies. .ence, light felonies are excluded e)en though resulting from the same single act. C&'P/ 0 C%(' S result when the offender has to commit an offense as a necessary means for committing another offense. &nly one information shall be filed and if pro)en, the penalty for the more serious crime shall be imposed. Complex Crime vs. Special Complex Crime vs. eli!o Con!inuado (200") Distinguish the following from each other: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: "n &%D(#"%1 C&'P/ 0 C%(' is made up of two or more crimes being punished in distinct pro)isions of the %e)ised Penal Code but alleged in one information either because they were brought about by a single felonious act or because one offense is a necessary means for committing the other offense or offenses. !hey are alleged in one information so that only one penalty shall be imposed. "s to penalties, in ordinary complex crime, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed and in its maximum period. " SP C("/ C&'P/ 0 C%(' , on the other hand, is made up of two or more crimes which are considered only as components of a single indi)isible offense being punished in one pro)ision of the %e)ised Penal Code. "s to penalties, special complex crime, only one penalty is specifically prescribed for all the component crimes which are regarded as one indi)isible offense. !he component crimes are not regarded as distinct crimes and so the penalty for the most serious crime is not the penalty to be

imposed nor in its maximum period. (t is the penalty specifically pro)ided for the special complex crime that shall be applied according to the rules on imposition of the penalty. D /(!& C&#!(#U"D&, or C&#!(#U&US C%(' , is a term used to denote as only one crime a series of felonious acts arising from a single criminal resolution, not susceptible of di)ision, which are carried out in the same place and at about the same time, and )iolating one and the same penal pro)ision. !he acts done must be impelled by one criminal intent or purpose, such that each act merely constitutes a partial execution of a particular crime, )iolating one and the same penal pro)ision. (t in)ol)es a concurrence of felonious acts )iolating a common right, a common penal pro)ision, and (mpelled by a single criminal impulse 2People )s. /edesma, 34 SC%" 335. Complex Crime# A$erra!io ic!us vs. error in personae (%&&4) Distinguish aberratio ictus from error in personae. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: "berratio ictus or mista6e in the blow occurs when a felonious act missed the person against whom it was directed and hit instead somebody who was not the intended )ictim. rror in personae, or mista6e in identity occurs when the felonious act was directed at the person intended, but who turned out to be somebody else. "berratio ictus brings about at least two 275 felonious conse8uence, ie. the attempted felony on the intended )ictim who was not hit and the felony on the unintended )ictim who was hit. " complex crime of the first form under "rt. *+, %PC generally result. (n error in personae only one crime is committed. Complex Crime# A$erra!io Ic!us' Error In Personae ( Prae!er In!en!ionem (%&&&) $hat do you understand by aberratio ictus: error in personae9 and praeter intentionem: Do they alter the criminal liability of an accused: xplain. 2*;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %:

"B %%"!(& (C!US or mista6e in the blow occurs when the offender deli)ered the blow at his intended )ictim but missed, and instead such blow landed on an unintended )ictim. !he situation generally brings about complex crimes where from a single act, two or more gra)e or less gra)e felonies resulted, namely the attempt against the intended )ictim and the conse8uence on the unintended )ictim. "s complex crimes, the penalty for the more serious crime shall be the one imposed and in the maximum period. (t is only when the resulting felonies are only light that complex crimes do not result and the penalties are to be imposed distinctly for each resulting crime. %%&% (# P %S&#" or mista6e in identity occurs when the offender actually hit the person to whom the blow was directed but turned out to be different from and not the )ictim intended. !he criminal liability of the offender is not affected, unless the mista6e in identity resulted to a crime different from what the offender intended to commit, in which case the lesser penalty between the crime intended and the crime committed shall be imposed but in the maximum period 2"rt. *<, %PC5. P%" ! % (#! #!(&# ' or where the conse8uence went beyond that intended or expected. !his is a mitigating circumstance 2"rt. =4. par. 4, %PC5 when there is a notorious disparity between the act or means employed by the offender and the resulting felony, i,e., the resulting felony could not be reasonably anticipated or foreseen by the offender from the act or means employed by him. Complex Crime# A$erra!io Ic!us# A!!emp!ed )urder *i!+ ,omicide (2000) Despite the massi)e ad)ertising campaign in media against firecrac6ers and gunfiring during the #ew 1ear>s celebrations, ?onas and ?a@a bought ten boxes of super lolo and plaApla in Bocaue, Bulacan. Before midnight of December 4=, =<<<, ?onas and ?a@a started their celebration by ha)ing a drin6ing spree at ?ona>s place by exploding their highpowered firecrac6ers in their neighborhood. (n the course of their con)ersation,

?onas confided to ?a@a that he has been 6eeping a longAtime grudge against his neighbor ?epoy in )iew of the latter>s refusal to lend him some money. $hile under the influence of li8uor, ?onas started throwing lighted super lolos inside ?epoy>s fence to irritate him and the same exploded inside the latter>s yard. Upon 6nowing that the throwing of the super lolo was deliberate, ?epoy became furious and sternly warned ?onas to stop his malicious act or he would get what he wanted. " heated argument between ?onas and ?epoy ensued but ?a@a tried to calm down his friend. "t midnight, ?onas con)inced ?a@a to lend him his .*B caliber pistol so that he could use it to 6noc6 down ?epoy and to end his arrogance. ?onas thought that after all, explosions were e)erywhere and nobody would 6now who shot ?epoy. "fter ?a@a lent his firearm to ?onas, the latter again started throwing lighted super lolos and plaAplas at ?epoy>s yard in order to pro)o6e him so that he would come out of his house. $hen ?epoy came out, ?onas immediately shot him with ?a@a>s .*B caliber gun but missed his target. (nstead, the bullet hit ?epoy>s fi)e year old son who was following behind him, 6illing the boy instantaneously, a5 $hat crime or crimes can ?onas and ?a@a be charged with: xplain. 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: ?onas and ?a@a, can be charged with the complex crime of attempted murder with homicide because a single act caused a less gra)e and a gra)e felony 2"rt. *+. %PC5. "ttempted murder is a less gra)e felony, while consummated homicide is a gra)e felony: both are punishable by afflicti)e penalties. Complex Crime# oc!rine o- A$erra!io

Ic!us# No! Applica$le (%&&.) "t the height of an altercation, Pedrito shot Paulo but missed, hitting !iburcio instead, resulting in the death of the latter. Pedrito, in)o6ing the doctrine of aberratio ictus, claims exemption from criminal liability. (f you were the @udge, how would you decide the case: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: (f ( were the ?udge, ( will con)ict Pedrito and find him guilty of the complex crime of .omicide with "ttempted

.omicide. !he single act of firing at Paulo resulted in the commission of two felonies, one gra)e 2homicide5 and the other less gra)e 2attempted homicide5 thus falling s8uarely under "rt. *+, %PC9 hence, the penalty would be for the more serious crime 2homicideC in its maximum period 2=3 years * months and = day to 7D years5. "berratio ictus 2mista6e in the blow5 could not be used as a defense as it is not an exempting circumstance. Pedrito is liable under the principle of "rt. *, %PC which ma6es a person criminally liable for all the natural and logical conse8uences of his felonious act.

*+ of the Code may apply under the conditions therein pro)ided. "/! %#"!(E "#S$ %: !he crime of coup d>etat cannot be complexed with the crime of rebellion because both crimes are directed against the Go)ernment or for political purposes, although the principal offenders are different. !he essence may be the same and thus constitute only one crime. (n this situation, the two crimes are not distinct and therefore, may not be proper to apply "rticle *+ of the Code. Complex Crimes# e!ermina!ion o- !+e

Complex Crimes# Coup d/e!a! ( re$ellion ( sedi!ion (2000) =5 Can there be a complex crime of coup d>etat with rebellion: 7; 75 Can there be a complex crime of coup d>etat with sedition: 7; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =5 1es, if there was conspiracy between the offender- offenders committing the coup d>etat and the offenders committing the rebellion. By conspiracy, the crime of one would be the crime of the other and )ice )ersa. !his is possible because the offender in coup d>etat may be any person or persons belonging to the military or the national police or a public officer, whereas rebellion does not so re8uire. 'oreo)er, the crime of coup d>etat may be committed singly, whereas rebellion re8uires a public uprising and ta6ing up arms to o)erthrow the duly constituted go)ernment. Since the two crimes are essentially different and punished with distinct penalties, there is no legal impediment to the application of "rt. *+ of the %e)ised Penal Code. 75 1es, coup d>etat can be complexed with sedition because the two crimes are essentially different and distinctly punished under the %e)ised Penal Code. Sedition may not be directed against the Go)ernment or nonApolitical in ob@ecti)e, whereas coup d>etat is always political in ob@ecti)e as it is directed against the Go)ernment and led by persons or public officer holding public office belonging to the military or national police. "rt.

Crime (%&&&) ", actuated by malice and with the use of a fully automatic 'A=* subAmachine gun, shot a group of persons who were seated in a coc6pit with one burst of successi)e, continuous, automatic fire. Four 2*5 persons were 6illed thereby, each ha)ing hit by different bullets coming from the subAmachine gun of ". Four 2*5 cases of murder were filed against ". !he trial court ruled that there was only one crime committed by " for the reason that, since " performed only one act, he ha)ing pressed the trigger of his gun only once, the crime committed was murder. Conse8uently, the trial @udge sentenced " to @ust one penalty of reclusion perpetua. $as the decision of the trial @udge correct: xplain. 2*;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he decision of the trial @udge is not correct. $hen the offender made use of an automatic firearm, the acts committed are determined by the number of bullets discharged inasmuch as the firearm being automatic, the offender need only press the trigger once and it would fire continually. For each death caused by a distinct and separate bullet, the accused incurs distinct criminal liability. .ence, it is not the act of pressing the trigger which should be considered as producing the se)eral felonies, but the number of bullets which actually produced them. Complex Crimes# Na!ure ( Penal!1 Involved (%&&&)

$hat constitutes a complex crime: .ow many crimes maybe in)ol)ed in a complex crime: $hat is the penalty therefor: 2*;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: " complex crime is constituted when a single act caused two or more gra)e or less gra)e felonies or when an offense is committed as a necessary means to commit another offense 2"rt. *+, %PC5. "t least two 275 crimes are in)ol)ed in a complex crime9 either two or more gra)e or less gra)e felonies resulted from a single act, or an offense is committed as a necessary means for committing another. !he penalty for the more serious crime shall be imposed and in its maximum period. 2"rt. *+, %PC5 Complex Crimes# 2rdinar1 Complex Crime vs. Special Complex Crime (2000) Distinguish between an ordinary complex crime and a special complex crime as to their concepts and as to the imposition of penalties. 7; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: (# C&#C P! A "n &%D(#"%1 C&'P/ 0 C%(' is made up of two or more crimes being punished in distinct pro)isions of the %e)ised Penal Code but alleged in one (nformation either because they were brought about by a single felonious act or because one offense is a necessary means for committing the other offense or offenses. !hey are alleged in one (nformation so that only one penalty shall be imposed. " SP C("/ C&'P/ 0 C%(' , on the other hand, is made up of two or more crimes which are considered only as components of a single indi)isible offense being punished in one pro)ision of the %e)ised Penal Code. "S !& P #"/!( S A(n &%D(#"%1 C&'P/ 0 C%(' , the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed and in its maximum period. (n SP C("/ C&'P/ 0 C%(' , only one penalty is specifically prescribed for all the component crimes which are regarded as one indi)isible offense. !he component crimes are not regarded as distinct crimes and so the penalty for the most serious crime is not the penalty to be imposed nor in its maximum period.

(t is the penalty specifically pro)ided for the special complex crime that shall be applied according to the rules on imposition of the penalty. Con!inuin3 2--ense vs. eli!o Con!inuado

(%&&4) Differentiate delito continuado from a continuing offense. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: D /(!& C&#!(#U"D&, or C&#!(#U&US C%(' , is a term used to denote as only one crime a series of felonious acts arising from a single criminal resolution, not susceptible of di)ision, which are carried out in the same place and at about the same time, and )iolating one and the same penal pro)ision. !he acts done must be impelled by one criminal intent or purpose, such that each act merely constitutes a partial execution of a particular crime, )iolating one and the same penal pro)ision. (t in)ol)es a concurrence of felonious acts )iolating a common right, a common penal pro)ision, and impelled by a single criminal impulse 2People )s. /eGdesma, 34 SC%" 335. &n the other hand, a C&#!(#U(#G &FF #S is one whose essential ingredients too6 place in more than one municipality or city, so much so that the criminal prosecution may be instituted and the case tried in the competent court of any one of such municipality or city. !he term HC&#!(#U D C%(' H or delito continuado mandates that only one information should be filed against the offender although a series of felonious acts were performed9 the term Hcontinuing crimeH is more pertinently used with reference to the )enue where the criminal action may be instituted.

ea!+ Penal!1 (2004) ". !he death penalty cannot be inflicted under which of the following circumstances: =5 $hen the guilty person is at least =+ years of age at the time of the commission of the crime. 75 $hen the guilty person is more than 3D years of age. 45 $hen, upon appeal to or automatic re)iew by the Supreme Court, the re8uired ma@ority for the imposition

of the death penalty is not obtained. *5 $hen the person is con)icted of a capital crime but before execution becomes insane. B5 $hen the accused is a woman while she is pregnant or within one year after deli)ery. xplain your answer or choice briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: ". Understanding the word HinflictedH to mean the imposition of the death penalty, not its execution, the circumstance in which the death penalty cannot be inflicted is no. 7: Hwhen the guilty person is more than 3D years of ageH 2"rt. *3, %e)ised Penal Code5. (nstead, the penalty shall be commuted to reclusion perpetua, with the accessory penalties pro)ided in "rticle *D, %FC. (n circumstance no. = when the guilty person is at least =+ years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, the death penalty can be imposed since the offender is already of legal age when he committed the crime. Circumstance no. 4 no longer operates, considering the decision of the Supreme Court in People )s. fren 'ateo 2G.%. =*3I3+A+3, ?uly 3, 7DD*5 pro)iding an intermediate re)iew for such cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment before they are ele)ated to the Supreme Court. (n circumtances nos. * J B, the death penalty can be imposed if prescribed by the law )iolated although its execution shall be suspended when the con)ict becomes insane before it could be executed and while he is insane. /i6ewise, the death penalty can be imposed upon a woman but its execution shall be suspended during her pregnancy and for one year after her deli)ery. "/! %#"!(E "#S$ %: !he word H(#F/(C! DH is found only in "rt. +4 to the effect that the death penalty may not be H(#F/(C! DH upon a pregnant woman, such penalty is to be suspended. (f H(#F/(C! DH is to be construed as H 0 CU!(&#H, then #o. B is the choice. ea!+ Penal!1# 4uali-ied 5ape# 5e6uisi!es (2004) GE was con)icted of raping !C, his niece, and he was sentenced to death. (t was alleged in the information that the )ictim was a minor below se)en years old, and her mother testified that she was

only six years and ten months old, which her aunt corroborated on the witness stand. !he information also alleged that the accused was the )ictim>s uncle, a fact pro)ed by the prosecution. &n automatic re)iew before the Supreme Court, accusedAappellant contends that capital punishment could not be imposed on him because of the inade8uacy of the charges and the insufficiency of the e)idence to pro)e all the elements of the heinous crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt. (s appellant>s contention correct: %eason briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, appellant>s contention is correct insofar as the age of the )ictim is concerned. !he age of the )ictim raped has not been pro)ed beyond reasonable doubt to constitute the crime as 8ualified rape and deser)ing of the death penalty. !he guidelines in appreciating age as a 8ualifying circumstance in rape cases ha)e not been met, to wit: =5 !he primary e)idence of the age of the )ictim is her birth certificate9 75 (n the absence of the birth certificate, age of the )ictim maybe pro)en by authentic document, such as baptismal certificate and school records9 45 (f the aforesaid documents are shown to ha)e been lost or destroyed or otherwise una)ailable, the testimony, if clear and credible of the )ictim>s mother or any member of the family, by consanguinity or affinity, who is 8ualified to testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party pursuant to Section *D, %ule =4D of the %ules on )idence shall be sufficient but only under the following circumstances: 2a5 (f the )ictim is alleged to be below 4 years of age and what is sought to be pro)ed is that she is less than 3 years old9 2b5 (f the )ictim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is sought to be pro)ed is that she is less than =7 years old9 2c5 (f the )ictim is alleged to be below =7 years of age and what is sought to be pro)ed is that she is less than =+ years old. *5 (n the absence of a certificate of li)e birth, authentic document, or the testimony of the )ictim>s mother or relati)es concerning the )ictim>s age under the circumstances abo)eAstated, complainant>s sole testimony can suffice, pro)ided that it is expressly and clearly admitted by the accused 2People us. Pruna, 4<D SC%" B33 K7DD7L5.

,a$i!ual elin6uenc1 ( 5ecidivism (200%) ?uan de Castro already had three 245 pre)ious con)ictions by final @udgment for theft when he was found guilty of %obbery with .omicide. (n the last case, the trial ?udge considered against the accused both recidi)ism and habitual delin8uency. !he accused appealed and contended that in his last con)iction, the trial court cannot consider against him a finding of recidi)ism and, again, of habitual delin8uency. (s the appeal meritorious: xplain. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, the appeal is not meritorious. %ecidi)ism and habitual delin8uency are correctly considered in this case because the basis of recidi)ism is different from that of habitual delin8uency. ?uan is a recidi)ist. .abitual delin8uency, which brings about an additional penalty when an offender is con)icted a third time or more for specified crimes, is correctly considered because ?uan had already three 245 pre)ious con)ictions by final @udgment for theft and again con)icted for %obbery $ith .omicide. "nd the crimes specified as basis for habitual delin8uency includes, inter alia, theft and robbery. Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La* (%&&4) (tos was con)icted of an offense penaliMed by a special law. !he penalty prescribed is not less than six years but not more than twel)e years. #o modifying circumstance attended the commission of the crime. (f you were the @udge, will you apply the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw: (f so, how will you apply it: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: (f ( were the @udge, ( will apply the pro)isions of the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw, as the last sentence of Section = "ct *=D4, specifically pro)ides the application thereof for )iolations of special laws. Under the same pro)ision, the minimum must not be less than the minimum pro)ided therein 2six years and one day5 and the maximum shall not be more than the maximum pro)ided therein, i.e. twel)e years. 2People )s. %osalina %eyes, =+I SC%" =+*5

Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La* (%&&&) "ndres is charged with an offense defined by a special law. !he penalty prescribed for the offense is imprisonment of not less than fi)e 2B5 years but not more than ten K=D5 years. Upon arraignment, he entered a plea of guilty. (n the imposition of the proper penalty, should the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw be applied: (f you were the ?udge trying the case, what penalty would you impose on "ndres: 2*;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw should be applied because the minimum imprisonment is more than one 2=5 year. (f ( were the ?udge, ( will impose an indeterminate sentence, the maximum of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed by law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum penalty prescribed by the same. ( ha)e the discretion to impose the penalty within the said minimum and maximum. Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La* (%&&&) " was con)icted of illegal possession of grease guns and two !hompson subAmachine guns punishable under the old law K%" #o,*L with imprisonment of from fi)e 2B5 to ten 2=D5 years. !he trial court sentenced the accused to suffer imprisonment of fi)e 2B5 years and one 2=5 day. (s the penalty thus imposed correct: xplain. 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: (ndeterminate Sentence /aw does not apply to: !he penalty imposed, being only a straight penalty, is not correct because it does not comply with the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw which applies to this case. Said law re8uires that if the offense is punished by any law other than the %e)ised Penal Code, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum penalty fixed by the law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum penalty prescribed by the same.

Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La* (2002) .ow are the maximum and the minimum terms of the indeterminate sentence for

offenses punishable under the %e)ised Penal Code determined: 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: For crimes punished under the %e)ised Penal Code, the maximum term of the indeterminate sentence shall be the penalty properly imposable under the same Code after considering the attending mitigating and-or aggra)ating circumstances according to "rt, I* of said Code. !he minimum term of the same sentence shall be fixed within the range of the penalty next lower in degree to that prescribed for the crime under the said Code. Under the law, what is the purpose for fixing the maximum and the minimum terms of the indeterminate sentence: 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he purpose of the law in fixing the minimum term of the sentence is to set the grace period at which the con)ict may be released on parole from imprisonment, unless by his conduct he is not deser)ing of parole and thus he shall continue ser)ing his prison term in ?ail but in no case to go beyond the maximum term fixed in the sentence.

is less than one year 2Sec. 7, "rt. *=D4, as amended5. c5 a straight penalty of 7 years. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, because the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw will apply when the minimum of the penalty exceeds one year. "/! %#"!(E "#S$ %. (f the imposition of straight penalty consists of the minimum period of the penalty prescribed by law, then it may be allowed because it fa)ors the accused. Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La*# Excep!ions (%&&&) Under what circumstances is the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw not applicable: 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =5 Persons con)icted of offenses punished with death penalty or life imprisonment9 75 !hose con)icted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason9 45 !hose con)icted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage9 *5 !hose con)icted of piracy9 B5 !hose who are habitual delin8uents9 I5 !hose who shall ha)e escaped from confinement or e)aded sentence9 35 !hose who )iolated the terms of conditional pardon granted to them by the Chief xecuti)e9 +5 !hose whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year9 <5 !hose who, upon the appro)al of the law 2December B, =<445. had been sentenced by final ?udgment9 =D5 !hose sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension. Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La*# Excep!ions (2000) $hen would the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw be inapplicable: *; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he (ndeterminate Sentence /aw is not applicable to: =5 those persons con)icted of offenses punished with death penalty or lifeimprisonment or reclusion perpetua9 75 those con)icted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason9 45 those con)icted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage9 *5 those con)icted of piracy9 B5 those who

Inde!ermina!e Sen!ence La* (200") .arold was con)icted of a crime defined and penaliMed by a special penal law where the imposable penalty is from I months, as minimum, to 4 years, as maximum. State with reasons whether the court may correctly impose the following penalties: a5 a straight penalty of =D months9 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, because the penalty is less than one year, a straight penalty may be imposed. 2People ). "rellano, G.%. #o, *IBD=, &ctober B, =<4<5 "/! %#"!(E "#S$ %: Under the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw, the minimum imposable penalty shall be imposed but the maximum shall not exceed the maximum imposable by law. b5 I months, as minimum, to == months, as maximum9 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, because (ndeterminate Sentence /aw does not apply when the penalty imposed

are habitual delin8uents9 I5 those who shall ha)e escaped from confinement or e)aded sentence9 35 those who ha)ing been granted conditional pardon by the Chief xecuti)e shall ha)e )iolated the terms thereof9 +5 those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year9 <5 those already sentenced by final @udgment at the time of appro)al of this "ct9 and =D5 those whose sentence imposes penalties which do not in)ol)e imprisonment, li6e destierro. Penal!ies7 8ine or Imprisonmen! vs. Su$sidiar1 Imprisonmen! (200") and ' are con)icted of a penal law that imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment or both fine and imprisonment. !he @udge sentenced them to pay the fine, @ointly and se)erally, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insol)ency. (s the penalty proper: xplain. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he penalty is not proper. !he two accused must separately pay the fine, which is their penalty. Solidary liability applies only to ci)il liabilities. "/! %#"!(E "#S$ %: #&, because in penal law when there are se)eral offenders, the court in the exercise of its discretion shall determine what shall be the share of each offender depending upon the degree of participation N as principal, accomplice or accessory. (f within each class of offender, there are more of them, such as more than one principal or more than one accomplice or accessory, the liability in each class of offender shall be subsidiary. "nyone of the may be re8uired to pay the ci)il liability pertaining to such offender without pre@udice to reco)ery from those whose share ha)e been paid by another. 'ay the @udge impose an alternati)e penalty of fine or imprisonment: xplain. 2*;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o. " fine, whether imposed as a single or as an alternati)e penalty, should not and cannot be reduced or con)erted into a prison term. !here is no rule for transmutation of the amount of a fine into a term of imprisonment. 2People ). Dacuycuy, G.%. #o. /A*B=73 'ay B, =<+<5

Penal!ies7 Pecuniar1 Penal!ies vs. Pecuniar1 Lia$ili!ies (200") Distinguish pecuniary penalties from pecuniary liabilities. 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: Pecuniary liabilities do not include restitution, but include reparation of damages caused, the indemnification for conse8uential damages, as well as fines and cost of the proceedings. Pecuniary penalties include fines and cost of the proceedings. Penal!ies# Complex Crime o- Es!a-a (%&&9) " was con)icted of the complex crime of estafa through falsification of public document. Since the amount (n)ol)ed did not exceed P7DD.DD, the penalty prescribed by law for estafa is arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods. !he penalty prescribed by law for falsification of public document is prision mayor plus fine not to exceed PB,DDD.DD. (mpose the proper prison penalty. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he proper penalty is "#1 %"#G $(!.(# prision correccional 2six 2I5 months and one 2=5 day to six 2I5 years5 as '(#('U', to "#1 %"#G within prision mayor maximum 2ten 2=D5 years and one 2=5 day to twel)e 2=75 years5 as '"0('U'. !his is in accordance with People us, GonMales, 34 Phil, B*<, where (t was ruled that for the purpose of determining the penalty next lower in degree, the penalty that should be considered as a starting point is the whole of prision mayor, it being the penalty prescribed by law, and not prision mayor in its maximum period, which is only the penalty actually applied because of "rticle *+ of the %e)ised Penal Code. !he penalty next lower in degree therefor is prision correccional and it is within the range of this penalty that the minimum should be ta6en. Penal!ies# 8ac!ors !o Consider (%&&%) (magine that you are a ?udge trying a case, and based on the e)idence presented and the applicable law, you ha)e decided on the guilt of two 275 accused. (ndicate

the fi)e 2B5 steps you would follow to determine the exact penalty to be imposed. Stated differently, what are the factors you must consider to arri)e at the correct penalty: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: = the crime committed9 7 Stage of execution and degree of participation9 4 Determine the penalty9 * Consider the modifying circumstances9 B Determine whether (ndeterminate Sentence /aw is applicable or not. Penal!ies# ,omicide *: )odi-1in3 Circums!ance (%&&") .omer was con)icted of homicide. !he trial court appreciated the following modifying circumstances: the aggra)ating circumstance of nocturnity, and the mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation, no intent to commit so gra)e a wrong, illiteracy and )oluntary surrender. !he imposable penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal the range of which is twel)e 2=75 years and one 2=5 day to twenty 27D5 years. !a6ing into account the attendant aggra)ating and mitigating circumstances, and applying the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw, determine the proper penalty to be imposed on the accused. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: (t appears that there is one aggra)ating circumstance 2nocturnity5, and four mitigating circumstances 2passion and obfuscation, no intent to commit so gra)e a wrong as that committed and )oluntary surrender5. Par. *, "rt. I* should be applied. .ence there will be offAsetting of modifying circumstances, which will now result in the excess of three mitigating circumstances. !his will therefore @ustify in reducing the penalty to the minimum period. !he existence of an aggra)ating circumstance, albeit there are four aggra)ating, will not @ustify the lowering of the penalty to the next lower degree under paragraph B of said "rticle, as this is applicable only if !. % (S #& "GG%"E"!(#G C(%CU'S!"#C present. Since the crime committed is .omicide and the penalty therefor is reclusion temporal, the '"0('U' sentence under the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw should be the minimum of the penalty, which is =7 years and = day to =* years

and + months. !he '(#('U' penalty will thus be the penalty next lower in degree, which is prision mayor in its full extent 2I years and = day to =7 years5. rgo, the proper penalty would be I years and = day, as minimum, to =7 years and = day, as maximum. ( belie)e that because of the remaining mitigating circumstances after the offAsetting it would be )ery logical to impose the minimum of the '(#('U' sentence under the (S/ and the minimum of the '"0('U' sentence.

Penal!ies# )i!i3a!in3 Circums!ances *:ou! A33rava!in3 Circums!ance (%&&9) "ssume in the preceding problem that there were two mitigating circumstances and no aggra)ating circumstance. (mpose the proper prison penalty. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !here being two 275 mitigating circumstances without any aggra)ating circumstance, the proper prison penalty is arresto mayor 2in any of its periods, ie. %anging from one 2=5 month and one 2=5 day to six 2I5 months5 as '(#('U' to prision correccional in its maximum period four 2*5 years, two 275 months, and one 2=5 day to six 2I5 years as '"0('U'. Under "rt. I*, par. B of the %e)ised Penal Code, when a penalty contains three periods, each one of which forms a period in accordance with "rticle 3I and 33 of the same Code, and there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggra)ating circumstances, the penalty next lower in degree should be imposed. For purposes of the (ndeterminate Sentence /aw, the penalty next lower in degree should be determined without regard as to whether the basic penalty pro)ided by the %e)ised Penal Code should be applied in its maximum or minimum period as circumstances modifying liability may re8uire. !he penalty next lower in degree to prision correccional. !herefore, as pre)iously stated, the minimum should be within the range of arresto mayor and the maximum is within the range of prision correctional in its maximum period. Penal!ies# Parricide *: )i!i3a!in3 Circums!ance (%&&9)

" and B pleaded guilty to the crime of parricide. !he court found three mitigating circumstances, namely, plea of guilty, lac6 of (nstruction and lac6 of intent to commit so gra)e a wrong as that committed. !he prescribed penalty for parricide is reclusion perpetua to death. (mpose the proper principal penalty. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. )en if there are two or more mitigating circumstances, a court cannot lower the penalty by one degree 2"rt. I4. par. 4, %e)ised Penal Code9 People )s. Formigones, +3 Phil. I+B5. (n U.S. )s. %elador ID Phil. B<4, where the crime committed was parricide with the two 275 mitigating circumstances of illiteracy and lac6 of intention to commit so gra)e a wrong, and with no aggra)ating circumstance, the Supreme Court held that the proper, penalty to be imposed is reclusion perpetua. Penal!ies# Preven!ive Imprisonmen! (%&&4) =5 $hen is there pre)enti)e imprisonment: 75 $hen is the accused credited with the full time of his pre)enti)e imprisonment, and when is he credited with *-B thereof: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =5 !here is pre)enti)e imprisonment when Ka5 an offender is detained while the criminal case against him is being heard, either because the crime committed is a capital offense and not bailable, or e)en if the crime committed was bailable, the offender could not post the re8uired bail for his pro)isional liberty. 75 "n accused is credited with the full time of his pre)enti)e imprisonment if he )oluntarily agreed in writing to abide by the rules of the institution imposed upon its prisoners, pro)ided that: a5 the penalty imposed on him for the crime committed consists of a depri)ation of liberty9 b5 he is not dis8ualified from such credit for being a recidi)ist, or for ha)ing been pre)iously con)icted for two or more times of any crime, or for ha)ing failed to surrender )oluntarily for the execution of the sentence upon being so summoned 2"rt. 7<, %PC5. $here the accused howe)er did not agree he would only be credited with *-B of the time he had undergone pre)enti)e imprisonment.

Penal!ies# 5eclusion Perpe!ua (5A) No. 9&"& (200") Under "rticle 73 of the %e)ised Penal Code, as amended by %epublic "ct 2%"5 #o. 3<B<, reclusion perpetua shall be from 7D years and = day to *D years. Does this mean that reclusion perpetua is now a di)isible penalty: xplain. 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, because the Supreme Court has repeatedly called the attention of the Bench and the Bar to the fact that the penalties of reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment are not synonymous and should be applied correctly and as may be specified by the applicable law. %eclusion perpetua has a specific duration of 7D years and = day to *D years 2"rt. 735 and accessory penalties 2"rt. *=5, while life imprisonment has no definite term or accessory penalties. "lso, life imprisonment is imposable on crimes punished by special laws, and not on felonies in the Code 2People )s. De GuMman, G.%. #os. B=4+BA+I, ?an. 77, =<<49 People )s. strella, G.%. #os. <7BDIAD3, "pril 7+, =<<49 People )s. "l)ero, G.%. #o. 374=<, ?une 4D,=<<49 People )s. /apiroso, G.%. #o. =77BD3, Feb. 7B, =<<<5.Ksee Criminal /aw Conspectus, page =BIL

Penal!ies# 5eclusion Perpe!ua vs. Li-e Imprisonmen! (%&&4) Differentiate reclusion perpetua from life imprisonment. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: % C/US(&# P %P !U" is that penalty pro)ided for in the %e)ised Penal Code for crimes defined in and penaliMed therein except for some crimes defined by special laws which impose reclusion perpetua, such as )iolations of %epublic "ct I*7B, as amended by %epublic "ct 3IB< or of PD =+ID9 while /(F ('P%(S&#' #! is a penalty usually pro)ided for in special laws. %eclusion perpetua has a duration of twenty 27D5 years and one 2=5 day to forty K*DL years under %epublic "ct 3IB<, while life imprisonment has no duration9 reclusion perpetua may be reduced by one or two degrees9 reclusion perpetuates accessory penalties while life imprisonment does not ha)e any accessory penalties 2People )s. Baguio, =<I SC%" *B<, People )s.

Panellos, 7DB SC%" B*I5.

courtOs prior appro)al. a5 $hat is the proper period of probation: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he period shall not be less than twice the total number of days of subsidiary imprisonment. Under "ct #o. =347, subsidiary imprisonment for )iolations of special laws shall not exceed I months at the rate of one day of imprisonment for e)ery F7.BD. .ence, the proper period of probation should not be less than 2I months nor more than =7 months. Since PBD,DDD.DD fine is more than the maximum subsidiary imprisonment of I months at P7.BD a day. b5 Supposing before the &rder of Discharge was issued by the court but after the lapse of the period of probation, 'aganda transferred residence without prior appro)al of the court. 'ay the court re)o6e the &rder of Probation and order her to ser)e the subsidiary imprisonment: xplain. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es. !he Court may re)o6e her probation. Probation is not coterminous with its period. !here must first be issued by the court an order of final discharge based on the report and recommendation of the probation officer. &nly then can the case of the probationer be terminated. 2Bala ). 'artineM, G.%. #o. I34D=, ?anuary 7<, =<<D, citing Sec. =I of P.D. #o. <I+5

Penal!ies# 5eclusion Perpe!ua vs. Li-e Imprisonmen! (200%) "fter trial, ?udge ?uan /aya of the 'anila %!C found Ben@amin Garcia guilty of 'urder, the )ictim ha)ing sustained se)eral bullet wounds in his body so that he died despite medical assistance gi)en in the &spital ng 'anila. Because the weapon used by Ben@amin was unlicensed and the 8ualifying circumstance of treachery was found to be present. ?udge /aya rendered his decision con)icting Ben@amin and sentencing him to Hreclusion perpetua or life imprisonmentH. "re Hreclusion perpetuaH and life imprisonment the same and can be imposed interchangeably as in the foregoing sentence: &r are they totally different: State your reasons. 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he penalty of reclusion perpetua and the penalty of life (mprisonment are totally different from each other and therefore, should not be used interchangeably. %eclusion perpetua is a penalty prescribed by the %e)ised Penal Code, with a fixed duration of imprisonment from 7D years and = day to *D years, and carries it with accessory penalties. /ife imprisonment, on the other hand, is a penalty prescribed by special laws, with no fixed duration of imprisonment and without any accessory penalty. Pro$a!ion La*7 Proper Period (200") 'aganda was charged with )iolation of the Bouncing Chec6s /aw 2BP 775 punishable by imprisonment of not less than 4D days but not more than = year or a fine of not less than but not more than double the amount of the chec6, which fine shall not exceed P7DD,DDD.DD, or both. !he court con)icted her of the crime and sentenced her to pay a fine of PBD,DDD.DD with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insol)ency, and to pay the pri)ate complainant the amount of the chec6. 'aganda was unable to pay the fine but filed a petition for probation. !he court granted the petition sub@ect to the condition, among others, that she should not change her residence without the

Pro$a!ion La*# ;arred $1 Appeal (%&&4) &n February 4, =<+I, %oberto was con)icted of arson through rec6less imprudence and sentenced to pay a fine of P=B,DDD.DD, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insol)ency by the %egional !rial Court of PueMon City. &n February =D, =<+I, he appealed to the Court of "ppeals. Se)eral months later, he filed a motion to withdraw the appeal on the ground that he is applying for probation. &n 'ay 3, =<+3, the Court of "ppeals granted the motion and considered the appeal withdrawn. &n ?une =D, =<+3, the records of the case were remanded to the trial court. %oberto filed a H'otion for ProbationH praying that execution of his sentence be suspended, and that a probation officer be ordered to conduct an (n)estigation and to submit a report on his probation.

!he @udge denied the motion on the ground that pursuant to Presidential Decree #o. =<<D, which too6 effect on ?uly =I,=<+I, no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the defendant has perfected an appeal from the @udgment of con)iction. (s the denial of %oberto>s motion correct: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es. )en if at the time of his con)iction %oberto was 8ualified for probation but that at the time of his application for probation, he is no longer 8ualified, he is not entitled to probation. !he 8ualification for probation must be determined as of the time the application is filed in Court 2Bernardo )s. ?udge, etal. G%#o. /+IBI=,#o), =D. =<<79 dwin de la CruM )s. ?udge Calle@o. et al, SPA=<IBB, "pril =+, =<<D, citing /lamado )s. C", et al, G% #o. +*+B<, ?une 7+, =<+<9 Bernardo us. ?udge Balagot, etal, G% +IBI=, #o). =D, =<<75. Pro$a!ion La*# ;arred $1 Appeal (200%) ", a subdi)ision de)eloper, was con)icted by the %!C of 'a6ati for failure to issue the subdi)ision title to a lot buyer despite full payment of the lot, and sentenced to suffer one year (mprisonment. " appealed the decision of the %!C to the Court of "ppeals but his appeal was dismissed. 'ay " still apply for probation: xplain. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, " is no longer 8ualified to apply for probation after he appealed from the @udgment of con)iction by the %!C. !he probation law 2PD <I+, as amended by PD=<<D5 now pro)ides that no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the accused has perfected an appeal from the @udgment of con)iction 2Sec. *, PD <I+5. Pro$a!ion La*# )aximum Term vs. To!al Term (%&&9) !he accused was found guilty of gra)e oral defamation in sixteen 2=I5 informations which were tried @ointly and was sentenced in one decision to suffer in each case a prison term of one 2=5 year and one 2=5 day to one 2=5 year and eight 2+5 months of prision correccional. $ithin the

period to appeal, he filed an application for probation under the Probation /aw of =<3I, as amended. Could he possibly 8ualify for probation: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es. (n Francisco )s. Court of "ppeals, 7*4 SC%" 4+*, the Supreme Court held that in case of one decision imposing multiple prison terms, the totality of the prison terms should not be ta6en into account for the purposes of determining the eligibility of the accused for the probation. !he law uses the word Hmaximum termH, and not total term. (t is enough that each of the prison terms does not exceed six years. !he number of offenses is immaterial for as long as the penalties imposed, when ta6en indi)idually and separately, are within the probationable period. Pro$a!ion La*# 2rder en1in3 Pro$a!ion#

No! Appeala$le (2002) " was charged with homicide. "fter trial, he was found guilty and sentenced to six 2I5 years and one 2=5 day in prision mayor, as minimum, to twel)e 2=75 years and one 2=5 day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. Prior to his con)iction, he had been found guilty of )agrancy and imprisoned for ten 2=D5 days of arresto manor and fined fifty pesos 2PBD.DD5. (s he eligible for probation: $hy: 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, he is not entitled to the benefits of the Probation /aw 2PD <I+, as amended5 does not extend to those sentenced to ser)e a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years 2Sec. <a5. (t is of no moment that in his pre)ious con)iction " was gi)en a penalty of only ten 2=D5 days of arresto mayor and a fine of PBD.DD. B. 'ay a probationer appeal from the decision re)o6ing the grant of probation or modifying the terms and conditions thereof: 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o. Under Section * of the Probation /aw, as amended, an order granting or denying probation is not appealable. Pro$a!ion La*# Period Covered (2004)

P0 was con)icted and sentenced to imprisonment of thirty days and a fine of one hundred pesos. Pre)iously, P0 was con)icted of another crime for which the penalty imposed on him was thirty days only. (s P0 entitled to probation: xplain briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, P0 may apply for probation. .is pre)ious con)iction for another crime with a penalty of thirty days imprisonment or not exceeding one 2=5 month does not dis8ualify him from applying for probation9 the penalty for his present con)iction does not dis8ualify him either from applying for probation, since the imprisonment does not exceed six 2I5 years 2Sec. <, Pres. Decree #o. <I+5.

who Hare sentenced to ser)e a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six yearsH are not entitled to the benefits of the law. 7. !he law and @urisprudence are to the effect that appeal by the accused from a sentence of con)iction forfeits his right to probation.2Sec. *, PD #o. <I+. "s amended by PD =<<D9 Bernardo us. Balagot9 Francisco )s. C": /lamado )s. C"9 De la CruM )s. ?udge Calle@o, C" case5. !his is the second consecuti)e year that this 8uestion was as6ed. (t is the sincere belief of the Committee that there is a need to reAexamine the doctrine. Firstly, much as the accused wanted to apply for probation he is proscribed from doing so as the maximum penalty is #&! P%&B"!(&#"B/ . Secondly, when the maximum penalty was reduced to one which allows probation it is but fair and @ust to grant him that right because it is apparent that the trial @udge committed an error and for which the accused should not be made to suffer. ?udicial tribunals in this @urisdiction are not only courts of law but also of e8uity. !hirdly, the @udgment of the appellate court should be considered a new decision as the trial court>s decision was )acated9 hence, he could ta6e ad)antage of the law when the decision is remanded to the trial court for execution 2Please see Dissenting opinion in Francisco )s. C"5. (t is suggested, therefore, that an examinee answering in this tenor should be credited with some points. Pro$a!ion La*# 5i3+!# ;arred $1 Appeal (2000) ?uan was con)icted of the %egional !rial Court of a crime and sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for a minimum of eight years. .e appealed both his con)iction and the penalty imposed upon him to the Court of "ppeals. !he appellate court ultimately sustained ?uan>s con)iction but reduced his sentence to a maximum of four years and eight months imprisonment. Could ?uan forthwith file an application for probation: xplain. +; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, ?uan can no longer a)ail of the probation because he appealed from the @udgment of con)iction of the trial court, and therefore, cannot apply for

Pro$a!ion La*# 5i3+!# ;arred $1 Appeal (%&&") (n a case for )iolation of Sec. +, %" I*7B, otherwise 6nown as the Dangerous Drugs "ct, accused Eincent was gi)en the benefit of the mitigating circumstances of )oluntary plea of guilt and drun6enness not otherwise habitual. .e was sentenced to suffer a penalty of six 2I5 years and one 2=5 day and to pay a fine of PI,DDD.DD with the accessory penalties pro)ided by law, plus costs. Eincent applied for probation. !he probation officer fa)orably recommended his application. = (f you were the ?udge, what action will you ta6e on the application: Discuss fully. 7 Suppose that Eincent was con)icted of a crime for which he was sentenced to a maximum penalty of ten 2=D5 years. Under the law, he is not eligible for probation. .e seasonably appealed his con)iction. $hile affirming the @udgment of con)iction, the appellate court reduced the penalty to a maximum of four 2*5 years and four 2*5 months ta6ing into consideration certain modifying circumstances. Eincent now applies for probation. .ow will you rule on his application: Discuss fully. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =. (f ( were the @udge, ( will deny the application for probation. !he accused is not entitled to probation as Sec. < of the Probation /aw, PD #&. <I+, as amended, specifically mentions that those

probation anymore. Section * of the Probation /aw, as amended, mandates that no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the accused has perfected an appeal from the @udgment of con)iction.

Suspension o- Sen!ence# Adul!s:)inors (200.) !here are at least 3 instances or situations in criminal cases wherein the accused, either as an adult or as a minor, can apply for and-or be granted a suspended sentence. numerate at least B of them. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =. Suspension of sentence of minor under P.D. ID4 as amended by %.". <4**. 7. Suspension of sentence of minor abo)e =B but below =+ years of age at the time of trial under %.". <4**. 4. Suspension of sentence of minor abo)e =B but below =+ years of age at the commission of the offense, while acting with discernment. *. Suspension of sentence by reason of insanity 2"rt. 3<, %e)ised Penal Code5. B. Suspension of sentence for first offense of a minor )iolating %?E. <=IB. 2Sec. 475 I. Suspension of sentence under the probation law. 2P.D. <I+5 3. Suspension of death sentence of a pregnant woman. 2"rt. +4, %e)ised Penal Code5 2#&!" B # : %.". <4** is outside the co)erage of the examination5 Suspension o- Sen!ence# )inors (2000) " was 7 months below =+ years of age when he committed the crime. .e was charged with the crime 4 months later. .e was 74 when he was finally con)icted and sentenced. (nstead of preparing to ser)e a @ail term, he sought a suspension of the sentence on the ground that he was a @u)enile offender Should he be entitled to a suspension of sentence: %easons. *; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, " is not entitled to a suspension of the sentence because he is no longer a minor at the time of promulgation of the sentence. For purposes of suspension of sentence, the offender>s age at the time

of promulgation of the sentence is the one considered, not his age when he committed the crime. So although " was below =+ years old when he committed the crime, but he was already 74 years old when sentenced, he is no longer eligible for suspension of the sentence. Can @u)enile offenders, who are recidi)ists, )alidly as6 for suspension of sentence: xplain. *; SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, so long as the offender is still a minor at the time of the promulgation of the sentence. !he law establishing Family Courts, %ep. "ct +4I<, pro)ides to this effect: that if the minor is found guilty, the court should promulgate the sentence and ascertain any ci)il liability which the accused may ha)e incurred. .owe)er, the sentence shall be suspended without the need of application pursuant to PD ID4, otherwise 6nown as the HChild and 1outh $elfare CodeH 2%" +4I<, Sec. Ba5, (t is under PD ID4 that an application for suspension of the sentence is re8uired and thereunder it is one of the conditions for suspension of sentence that the offender be a first time con)ict: this has been displaced by %" +4I<.

Suspension o- Sen!ence# <ou!+-ul 2--ender (%&&") Eictor, %ic6y, %od and %onnie went to the store of 'ang Pandoy. Eictor and %ic6y entered the store while %od and %onnie posted themsel)es at the door. "fter ordering beer %ic6y complained that he was shortchanged although 'ang Pandoy )ehemently denied it. Suddenly %ic6y whipped out a 6nife as he announced H.oldAup itoQH and stabbed 'ang Pandoy to death. %od boxed the store>s salesgirl /ucy to pre)ent her from helping 'ang Pandoy. $hen /ucy ran out of the store to see6 help from people next door she was chased by %onnie. "s soon as %ic6y had stabbed 'ang Pandoy, Eictor scooped up the money from the cash box. !hen Eictor and %ic6y dashed to the street and shouted, H!uma6bo na 6ayoQH %od was =* and %onnie was =3. !he money and other articles looted from the store of 'ang Pandoy were later found in the houses of Eictor and %ic6y.

= Discuss fully the criminal liability of Eictor, %ic6y, %od and %onnie. 7 "re the minors %od and %onnie entitled to suspended sentence under !he Child and 1outh $elfare Code: xplain. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: = . "ll are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide.... 7. #o, because the benefits of suspension of sentence is not a)ailable where the youthful offender has been con)icted of an offense punishable by life imprisonment or death, pursuant to P.D. #o. ID4, "rt. =<7, !he complex crime of robbery with homicide is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death under "rt. 7<* 2=5, %FC KPeople )s. Galit. 74D SC%" *+I5.

grant of amnesty. #ame at least B of these crimes. 27.B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: Crimes co)ered under Presidential Proclamation #o. 37*: =. Coup d>etat, 7. %ebellion or insurrection9 4. Disloyalty of public officers or employees9 *. (nciting to rebellion or insurrection9 B. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection9 I. Proposal to commit rebellion or insurrection9 3. Sedition9 +. Conspiracy to commit sedition9 <. (nciting to sedition9 =D. (llegal "ssembly9 ==. (llegal "ssociation9 =7. Direct "ssault9 =4. (ndirect "ssault9 =*. %esistance and disobedience to a person in authority9 =B. !umults and other disturbances9 =I. Unlawful use of means of publications and unlawful utterrances9 =3. "larm and scandal9 =+. (llegal Possession of firearms. Ex!inc!ion# Criminal ( Civil Lia$ili!ies# E--ec!s# ea!+ o- accused pendin3 appeal (2004) "0 was con)icted of rec6less imprudence resulting in homicide. !he trial court sentenced him to a prison term as well as to pay P=BD,DDD as ci)il indemnity and damages. $hile his appeal was pending, "0 met a fatal accident. .e left a young widow, 7 children, and a millionApeso estate. $hat is the effect, if any, of his death on his criminal as well as ci)il liability: xplain briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he death of "0 while his appeal from the @udgment of the trial court is pending, extinguishes his criminal liability. !he ci)il liability insofar as it arises from the crime and reco)erable under the %e)ised Penal Code is also extinguished9 but indemnity and damages may be reco)ered in a ci)il action if predicated on a source of obligation under "rt. ==B3, Ci)il Code, such as law, contracts, 8uasicontracts and 8uasiAdelicts, but not on the basis of delicts. 2People ). Bayotas,

E=TINCTI2N 28 C5I)INAL LIA;ILIT< Amnes!1 vs. P %%.0 (200.) Can former DS$D Secretary Din6y Soliman apply for amnesty: .ow about columnist %andy Da)id: 21ou are supposed to 6now the crimes or offenses ascribed to them as published in almost all newspapers for the past se)eral months.5 27.B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: Proclamation ==ID, which amended Proclamation 37*, applies only to offenses committed prior to =<<<. !hus, their applications shall be ineffectual and useless. General /im and General Puerubin of the Scout %angers and Philippine 'arines, respecti)ely, were changed with conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman under the "rticles of $ar. Can they apply for amnesty: 27.B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: Proclamation ==ID, which amended Proclamation 37*, applies only to offenses committed prior to =<<<. !hus, their applications shall be ineffectual and useless.

Amnes!1# Crimes Covered (200.) Under Presidential Proclamation #o. 37*, amending Presidential Proclamation #o. 4*3, certain crimes are co)ered by the

74I SC%" 74< 5. Ci)il indemnity and damages under the %e)ised Penal Code are reco)erable only if the accused had been con)icted with finality before he died. Ex!inc!ion# Criminal ( Civil Lia$ili!ies# E--ec!s# ea!+ o- 2--ended Par!1 (2000) For defrauding /orna, "lma was charged before the 'unicipal !rial Court of 'alolos, Bulacan. "fter a protracted trial, "lma was con)icted. $hile the case was pending appeal in the %egional !rial Court of the same pro)ince, /orna who was then suffering from breast cancer, died. "lma manifested to the court that with /orna>s death, her 2"lma>s5 criminal and ci)il liabilities are now extinguished. (s "lma>s contention correct: $hat if it were "lma who died, would it affect her criminal and ci)il liabilities: xplain. 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o. "lma>s contention is not correct. !he death of the offended party does not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender, because the offense is committed against the State KPeople )s. 'isola, +3 Phil. +4D, +445. .ence, it follows that the ci)il liability of "lma based on the offense committed by her is not extinguished. !he estate of /orna can continue the case. &n the other hand, if it were "lma who died pending appeal of her con)iction, her criminal liability shall be extinguished and therewith the ci)il liability under the %e)ised Penal Code 2"rt. +<, par. =, %PC5. .owe)er, the claim for ci)il indemnity may be instituted under the Ci)il Code 2"rt. ==B35 if predicated on a source of obligation other than delict, such as law, contracts, 8uasiAcontracts and 8uasiAdelicts 2People )s. Bayotas 74I SC%" 74<, G.%. =B7DD3, September 7, =<<*5 Pardon )s. "mnesty 27DDI5 numerate the differences between pardon and amnesty. 27.B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: a5 P"%D&# includes any crime and is exercised indi)idually by the President,

while "'# S!1 applies to classes of persons or communities who may be guilty of political offenses. b5 P"%D&# is exercised when the person is already con)icted, while "'# S!1 may be exercised e)en before trial or in)estigation. c5 P"%D&# loo6s forward and relie)es the offender of the penalty of the offense for which he has been con)icted9 it does not wor6 for the restoration of the rights to hold public office, or the right of suffrage, unless such rights are expressly restored by means of pardon, while "'# S!1 loo6s bac6ward and abolishes the offense and its effects, as if the person had committed no offense. d5 P"%D&# does not alter the fact that the accused is criminally liable as it produces only the extinction of the penalty, while "'# S!1 remo)es the criminal liability of the offender because it obliterates e)ery )estige of the crime. e5 P"%D&# being a pri)ate act by the President, must be pleaded and pro)ed by the person pardoned, while "'# S!1 which is a Proclamation of the Chief xecuti)e with the concurrence of Congress is a public act of which the courts should ta6e @udicial notice. Pardon# E--ec!# Civil In!erdic!ion (2004) !%1 was sentenced to death by final @udgment. But subse8uently he was granted pardon by the President. !he pardon was silent on the perpetual dis8ualification of !%1 to hold any public office. "fter his pardon, !%1 ran for office as 'ayor of "PP, his hometown. .is opponent sought to dis8ualify him. !%1 contended he is not dis8ualified because he was already pardoned by the President unconditionally. (s !%1>S contention correct: %eason briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, !%1>s contention is not correct. "rticle *D of the %e)ised Penal Code expressly pro)ides that when the death penalty is not executed by reason of commutation or pardon, the accessory penalties of perpetual absolute dis8ualification and ci)il interdiction during thirty 24D5 years from the date of the sentence shall remain as effects thereof, unless such accessory penalties ha)e been expressly remitted in the pardon. !his is because pardon only excuses the con)ict from ser)ing the

sentence but does not relie)e him of the effects of the con)iction unless expressly remitted in the pardon.

Pardon# E--ec!# 5eins!a!emen! (%&&4) /inda was con)icted by the Sandiganbayan of estafa, through falsification of public document. She was sentenced accordingly and ordered to pay, among others, PB,DDD.DD representing the balance of the amount defrauded. !he case reached the Supreme Court which affirmed the @udgment of con)iction. During the pendency of /inda>s motion for reconsideration in the said Court, the President extended to her an absolute pardon which she accepted. By reason of such pardon, she wrote the Department of Finance re8uesting that she be restored to her former post as assistant treasurer, which is still )acant. !he Department ruled that /inda may be reinstated to her former position without the necessity of a new appointment and directed the City !reasurer to see to it that the sum of PB,DDD.DD be satisfied. Claiming that she should not be made to pay PB,DDD.DD, /inda appealed to the &ffice of the President. !he &ffice of the President dismissed the appeal and held that ac8uittal, not absolute pardon. (s the only ground for reinstatement to one>s former position and that the absolute pardon does not exempt the culprit from payment of ci)il liability. (s /inda entitled to reinstatement: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, /inda is not entitled to reinstatement to her former position inasmuch as her right thereto had been relin8uished or forfeited by reason of her con)iction. !he absolute pardon merely extinguished her criminal liability, remo)ed her dis8ualification, and restored her eligibility for appointment to that office. She has to reAapply for such position and under the usual procedure re8uired for a new appointment. 'oreo)er, the pardon does not extinguish the ci)il liability arising from the crime. 2'onsanto )s.Factoran, ?r., =3D SC%" =<=59 see "rt. 4I, %PC5 Prescrip!ion o- Crimes# ;i3am1 (%&&")

?oe and 'arcy were married in Batanes in =<BB. "fter two years, ?oe left 'arcy and settled in 'indanao where he later met and married /inda on =7 ?une =<ID. !he second marriage was registered in the ci)il registry of Da)ao City three days after its celebration. &n =D &ctober =<3B 'arcy who remained in Batanes disco)ered the marriage of ?oe to /inda. &n = 'arch =<3I 'arcy filed a complaint for bigamy against ?oe. !he crime of bigamy prescribed in fifteen years computed from the day the crime is disco)ered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents. ?oe raised the defense of prescription of the crime, more than fifteen years ha)ing elapsed from the celebration of the bigamous marriage up to the filing of 'arcy>s complaint. .e contended that the registration of his second marriage in the ci)il registry of Da)ao City was constructi)e notice to the whole world of the celebration thereof thus binding upon 'arcy. .as the crime of bigamy charged against ?oe already prescribed: Discuss fully. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o. !he prescripti)e period for the crime of bigamy is computed from the time the crime was disco)ered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents. !he principle of constructi)e notice which ordinarily applies to land or property disputes should not be applied to the crime of bigamy, as marriage is not property. !hus when 'arcy filed a complaint for bigamy on 3 'arch =<3I, it was well within the reglamentary period as it was barely a few months from the time of disco)ery on =D &ctober =<3B. 2Sermonia )s. C", 744 SC%" =BB5

Prescrip!ion o- Crimes# Commencemen! (2000) &ne fateful night in ?anuary =<<D, while BAyear old "lbert was urinating at the bac6 of their house, he heard a strange noise coming from the 6itchen of their neighbor and playmate, "ra. $hen he peeped inside, he saw 'ina, "ra>s stepmother, )ery angry and strangling the BAyear old "ra to death. "lbert saw 'ina carry the dead body of "ra, place it inside the trun6 of her car and dri)e away. !he dead body of "ra was ne)er found. 'ina spread the news in the neighborhood that "ra went to li)e with

her grandparents in &rmoc City. For fear of his life, "lbert did not tell anyone, e)en his parents and relati)es, about what he witnessed. !wenty and a half 27D J =-75 years after the incident, and right after his graduation in Criminology, "lbert reported the crime to #B( authorities. !he crime of homicide prescribes in 7D years. Can the state still prosecute 'ina for the death of "ra despite the lapse of 7D J =-7 years: xplain, 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, the State can still prosecute 'ina for the death of "ra despite the lapse of 7D J =-7 years. Under "rticle <=, %PC, the period of prescription commences to run from the day on which the crime is disco)ered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents. (n the case at bar, the commission of the crime was 6nown only to "lbert, who was not the offended party nor an authority or an agent of an authority. (t was disco)ered by the #B( authorities only when "lbert re)ealed to them the commission of the crime. .ence, the period of prescription of 7D years for homicide commenced to run only from the time "lbert re)ealed the same to the #B( authorities. Prescrip!ion o- Crimes# Commencemen! (2004) &$ is a pri)ate person engaged in cattle ranching. &ne night, he saw "' stab CE treacherously, then throw the dead man>s body into a ra)ine. For 7B years, CEs body was ne)er seen nor found9 and &$ told no one what he had witnessed. 1esterday after consulting the parish priest, &$ decided to tell the authorities what he witnessed, and re)ealed that "' had 6illed CE 7B years ago. Can "' be prosecuted for murder despite the lapse of 7B years: %eason briefly. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, "' can be prosecuted for murder despite the lapse of 7B years, because the crime has not yet prescribed and legally, its prescripti)e period has not e)en commenced to run. !he period of prescription of a crime shall commence to run only from the day on which the crime has been disco)ered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents 2"rt. <=, %e)ised Penal Code5. &$, a

pri)ate person who saw the 6illing but ne)er disclosed it, is not the offended party nor has the crime been disco)ered by the authorities or their agents. Prescrip!ion o- Crimes# Concu$ina3e (200%) &n ?une =, =<++, a complaint for concubinage committed in February =<+3 was filed against %oberto in the 'unicipal !rial Court of !anMa, Ca)ite for purposes of preliminary in)estigation. For )arious reasons, it was only on ?uly 4, =<<+ when the ?udge of said court decided the case by dismissing it for lac6 of @urisdiction since the crime was committed in 'anila. !he case was subse8uently filed with the City Fiscal of 'anila but it was dismissed on the ground that the crime had already prescribed. !he law pro)ides that the crime of concubinage prescribes in ten 2=D5 years. $as the dismissal by the fiscal correct: xplain, 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: #o, the Fiscal>s dismissal of the case on alleged prescription is not correct. !he filing of the complaint with the 'unicipal !rial Court, although only for preliminary in)estigation, interrupted and suspended the period of prescription in as much as the @urisdiction of a court in a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information, not by the result of proof. 2People )s. Galano. 3B SC%" =<45 Prescription of Crimes9 False !estimony 2=<<*5 Paolo was charged with homicide before the %egional !rial Court of 'anila. "ndrew, a prosecution witness, testified that he saw Paolo shoot "bby during their heated argument. $hile the case is still pending, the City .all of 'anila burned down and the entire records of the case were destroyed. /ater, the records were reconstituted. "ndrew was again called to the witness stand. !his time he testified that his first testimony was false and the truth was he was abroad when the crime too6 place. !he @udge immediately ordered the prosecution of "ndrew for gi)ing a false testimony fa)orable to the defendant in a criminal case. = $ill the case against "ndrew prosper: 7 Paolo was ac8uitted. !he decision became final on ?anuary =D, =<+3. &n ?une

=+, =<<* a case of gi)ing false testimony was filed against "ndrew. "s his lawyer, what legal step will you ta6e: SUGG S! D "#S$ %: =5 1es. ... 75 "s lawyer of "ndrew, ( will file a motion to 8uash the (nformation on the ground of prescription. !he crime of false testimony under "rt. =+D has prescribed because Paolo, the accused in the principal case, was ac8uitted on ?anuary =D, =<+3 and therefore the penalty prescribed for such crime is arresto mayor under "rt. =+D, par. *, %PC. Crimes punishable by arresto mayor prescribes in fi)e 2B5 years 2"rt. <D, par. 4, %PC5. But the case against "ndrew was filed only on ?une =+, =<<*, whereas the principal criminal case was decided with finality on ?anuary =D, =<+3 and, thence the prescripti)e period of the crime commenced to run. From ?anuary =D, =<+3 to ?une =+, =<<* is more than fi)e 2B5 years.

prescribed at the time the information was filed 2People us. %arang, 2C"5 I7 &.G. I*I+9 Francisco )s. C", =77 SC%" B4+9 'agat )s. People. 7D= SC%" 7=5 otherwise prosecutors can easily circum)ent the rule of prescription in light offenses by the simple expediment of filing a gra)er offense which includes such light offense. b5 $hile the general rule is the failure of an accused to file a motion to 8uash before he pleads to the complaint or information, shall be deemed a wai)er of the grounds of a motion to 8uash, the exceptions to this are: 2=5 no offense was charged in the complaint or information9 275 lac6 of ?urisdiction9 245 extinction of the offense or penalty9 and 2*5 double @eopardy. Since the ground in)o6ed by the accused in his motion for reconsideration is extinction of the offense, then it can be raised e)en after plea. (n fact, it may e)en be in)o6ed on appeal 2People )s. Balagtas5 CI>IL LIA;ILIT< Civil lia$ili!1# E--ec! o- Ac6ui!!al (2000) #ame at least two exceptions to the general rule that in case of ac8uittal of the accused in a criminal case, his ci)il liability is li6ewise extinguished. 27;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: xceptions to the rule that ac8uittal from a criminal case extinguishes ci)il liability, are: =5 $hen the ci)il action is based on obligations not arising from the act complained of as a felony9 75 $hen ac8uittal is based on reasonable doubt or ac8uittal is on the ground that guilt has not been pro)en beyond reasonable doubt 2"rt. 7<, #ew Ci)il Code59 45 "c8uittal due to an exempting circumstance, li6e (nsanity9 *5 $here the court states in its ?udgment that the case merely in)ol)es a ci)il obligation9 B5 $here there was a proper reser)ation for the filing of a separate ci)il action9 I5 (n cases of independent ci)il actions pro)ided for in "rts. 4=, 47, 44 and 4* of the #ew Ci)il Code9 35 $hen the @udgment of ac8uittal includes a declaration that the fact from which the ci)il liability might arise did not exist 2Sapiera )s. C", 4=* SC%" 43D59 +5 $here the ci)il liability is not deri)ed or based on the criminal act of which the

Prescrip!ion o- Crimes# Simple Slander (%&&9) " was charged in an information with the crime of gra)e oral defamation but after trial, the court found him guilty only of the offense of simple slander. .e filed a motion for reconsideration contending that, under the law, the crime of simple slander would ha)e prescribed in two months from commission, and since the information against him was filed more than four months after the alleged commission of the crime, the same had already prescribed. !he Solicitor General opposed the motion on two grounds: first, in determining the prescripti)e period, the nature of the offense charged in the (nformation should be considered, not the crime pro)ed9 second, assuming that the offense had already prescribed, the defense was wai)ed by the failure of " to raise it in a motion to 8uash. %esol)e the motion for reconsideration. SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he motion for reconsideration should be granted.A a5 !he accused cannot be con)icted of the offense of simple slander although it is necessarily included in the offense of gra)e slander charged in the information, because, the lesser offense had already

accused is ac8uitted 2Sapiera )s. C". 4=* SC%" 43D5. Civil lia$ili!1# E--ec! o- Ac6ui!!al (2000) " was a =3Ayear old wor6ing student who was earning his 6eep as a cigarette )endor. B was dri)ing a car along busy spana Street at about 3:DD p.m. Beside B was C. !he car stopped at an intersection because of the red signal of the traffic light. $hile waiting for the green signal, C bec6oned " to buy some cigarettes. " approached the car and handed two stic6s of cigarettes to C. $hile the transaction was ta6ing place, the traffic light changed to green and the car immediately sped off. "s the car continued to speed towards Puiapo, " clung to the window of the car but lost his grip and fell down on the pa)ement. !he car did not stop. " suffered serious in@uries which e)entually caused his death. C was charged with %&BB %1 with .&'(C(D . (n the end, the Court was not con)inced with moral certainty that the guilt of C has been established beyond reasonable doubt and, thus, ac8uitted him on the ground of reasonable doubt. Can the family of the )ictim still reco)er ci)il damages in )iew of the ac8uittal of C: xplain. 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: 1es, as against C, ">s family can still reco)er ci)il damages despite C>s ac8uittal. $hen the accused in a criminal prosecution is ac8uitted on the ground that his guilt has not been pro)ed beyond reasonable doubt, a ci)il action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action re8uires only a preponderance of e)idence R"rt. 7<, CC5. (f ">s family can pro)e the negligence of B by preponderance of e)idence, the ci)il action for damages against B will prosper based on 8uasiA delict. $hoe)er by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, about preAexisting contractual relation between the parties, is called a 8uasiA delict K"rt. 7=3I, CC5. !his is entirely separate and distinct from ci)il liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code K"rts, 4=, 7=3I, 7=33, CCC.

Civil Lia$ili!1# Su$sidiar1# Emplo1ers (%&&?) Guy, while dri)ing a passenger @eepney owned and operated by 'ax, bumped Demy, a pedestrian crossing the street. Demy sustained in@uries which re8uired medical attendance for three months. Guy was charged with rec6less imprudence resulting to physical in@uries. Con)icted by the 'etropolitan !rial Court. Guy was sentenced to suffer a straight penalty of three months of arresto mayor and ordered to indemnify Demy in the sum of PB,DDD and to pay P=,DDD as attorney>s fees. Upon finality of the decision, a writ of execution was ser)ed upon Guy, but was returned unsatisfied due to his insol)ency. Demy mo)ed for a subsidiary writ of execution against 'ax. !he latter opposed the motion onAthe ground that the decision made no mention of his subsidiary liability and that he was not impleaded in the case. .ow will you resol)e the motion: KB;L SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he motion is to be granted. 'ax as an employer of Guy and engaged in an industry 2transportation business5 where said employee is utiliMed, is subsidiarily ci)illy liable under "rticle =D4 of the %e)ised Penal Code. )en though the decision made no mention of his subsidiary liability, the law )iolated 2%e)ised Penal Code5 itself mandates for such liability and 'ax is deemed to 6now it because ignorance of the law is ne)er excused. "nd since his liability is not primary but only subsidiary in case his employee cannot pay9 he need not be impleaded in the in the criminal case. (t suffices that he was duly notified of the motion for issuance of a subsidiary writ of execution and thus gi)en the opportunity to be heard. Civil Lia$ili!1# @+en )anda!or1# Criminal Lia$ili!1 (200") !he accused was found guilty of =D counts of rape for ha)ing carnal 6nowledge with the same woman. (n addition to the penalty of imprisonment, he was ordered to pay indemnity in the amount of PBD,DDD.DD for each count. &n appeal, the accused 8uestions the award of ci)il indemnity for each count, considering that the )ictim

is the same woman. .ow would you rule on the contention of the accused: xplain. 24;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he contention is unmeritorious. Under the law, e)ery person criminally liable is ci)illy liable. 2"rt. =DD, %e)ised Penal Code5 Since each count charges different felonious acts and ought to be punished differently, the concomitant ci)il indemnity ex delicto for e)ery criminal act should be ad@udged. Said ci)il indemnity is mandatory upon a finding of the fact of rape9 it is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different @ural foundations. 2People ). ?alos@os, G.%. #os. =47+3BA3I, #o)ember =I, 7DD=5 ama3es# ,omicide# Tempera!e ama3es

(200.) (n a crime of homicide, the prosecution failed to present any receipt to substantiate the heirs> claim for an award of actual damages, such as expenses for the wa6e and burial. $hat 6ind of damages may the trial court award to them and how much: 2B;5 SUGG S! D "#S$ %: !he court may award temperate damages in the amount of twentyAfi)e 2P7B,DDD.DD5 thousand pesos. Under @urisprudence, temperate damages is awarded in homicide when no sufficient proof of actual damages is offered or if the actual damages pro)en is less than twentyAfi)e thousand 2P7B,DDD5 2People ). Salona, G.%. #o. =B=7B=, 'ay =<, 7DD*5.