Persons in Authority any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an

individual or as a member of some court or governmental corporation, board or

commission.

Examples of Persons in Authority :

a. Barangay captain
b. Barangay chairman
c. Municipal mayor
d. Provincial fiscal
e. Justice of the peace
f. Municipal councilor
g. Teachers
h. Professors
i. Persons charged with the supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities
j. Lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance

Agent of Person in Authority any person who, by direct provision of law or by

election or by appointment by competent authority, is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and property.

Examples of agents of PIA :

a. Barrio councilman
b. Barrio policeman
c. Barangay leader
d. Any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority

Article 134-A
COUP D ETAT

ELEMENTS:
1. Committed by any person or persons belonging to the military or police
or holding any public office or employment; with or without civilian
support or participation
2. Swift attack Accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or
stealth
3. Directed against:
a. duly constituted authorities
b. any military camp or installation
c. communication networks or public utilities
d. other facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power
4. Purpose of seizing or diminishing state power

Article 145
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY
a. By using force, intimidation, threats, or frauds
b. Purpose is to prevent any member of Congress from
 1. attending the meeting of the assembly or any of its committees,
constitutional commissions or committees or divisions thereof, or
from
2. expressing his opinions or
3. casting his vote

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee
2. That he arrests or searches any member of Congress
3. That Congress, at the time of arrest or search, is in a regular or
special session
4. That the member searched has not committed a crime punishable
under the code by a penalty higher than prision mayor (1987
constitution: privilege from arrest while congress in session in all offenses
punishable by not more than 6 years imprisonment).

Article 148
DIRECT ASSAULT

ELEMENTS OF THE 1ST FORM OF DIRECT ASSAULT

a. That the offender employs force or intimidation.
b. That the aim of the offender is to attain any of the purposes of the
crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the crimes of sedition.
(victim need not be person in authority)
c. That there is no public uprising.

Example of the first form of direct assault:

Three men broke into a National Food Authority warehouse and lamented sufferings
of the people. They called on people to help themselves to all the rice. They did
not even help themselves to a single grain.

The crime committed was direct assault. There was no robbery for there was no
intent to gain. The crime is direct assault by committing acts of sedition under
Article 139 (5), that is, spoiling of the property, for any political or social end, of any
person municipality or province or the national government of all or any its
property, but there is no public uprising.

ELEMENTS OF THE 2ND FORM OF DIRECT ASSAULT:

a. That the offender (a) makes an attack, (b) employs force, (c) makes
a serious intimidation, or (d) makes a serious resistance.
b. That the person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent.
c. That at the time of the assault the person in authority or his agent
(a) is engaged in the actual performance of official duties (motive is
not essential), or that he is assaulted (b) by reason of the past
performance of official duties (motive is essential).
d. That the offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a person in
authority or his agent in the exercise of his duties (with intention to
offend, injure or assault).
e. That there is no public uprising.
Crime of direct assault can only be committed by means of dolo. It cannot be
committed by culpa.

Always complexed with the material consequence of the act (e.g. direct assault
with murder) except if resulting in a light felony, in which case, the consequence
is absorbed

The crime is not based on the material consequence of the unlawful act. The crime
of direct assault punishes the spirit of lawlessness and the contempt or hatred for
the authority or the rule of law.

To be specific, if a judge was killed while he was holding a session, the killing is not
the direct assault, but murder. There could be direct assault if the offender killed
the judge simply because the judge is so strict in the fulfillment of his duty. It is the
spirit of hate which is the essence of direct assault.

So, where the spirit is present, it is always complexed with the material
consequence of the unlawful act. If the unlawful act was murder or homicide
committed under circumstance of lawlessness or contempt of authority, the crime
would be direct assault with murder or homicide, as the case may be. In the
example of the judge who was killed, the crime is direct assault with murder or
homicide.

The only time when it is not complexed is when material consequence is a light
felony, that is, slight physical injury. Direct assault absorbs the lighter felony; the
crime of direct assault can not be separated from the material result of the act. So,
if an offender who is charged with direct assault and in another court for the slight
physical Injury which is part of the act, acquittal or conviction in one is a bar to the
prosecution in the other.

Hitting the policeman on the chest with fist is not direct assault because if done
against an agent of a person in authority, the force employed must be of serious
character
The force employed need not be serious when the offended party is a person in
authority (ex. Laying of hands)
The intimidation or resistance must be serious whether the offended party is an
agent only or a person in authority (ex. Pointing a gun)

Force Employed Intimidation/Resistance

Person in Need not be serious Serious
Authority
Agent Must be of serious Serious
character

Person in authority: any person directly vested with jurisdiction (power or

authority to govern and execute the laws) whether as an individual or as a
member of some court or governmental corporation, board or commission
 A barangay captain is a person in authority, so is a Division Superintendent of
schools, President of Sanitary Division and a teacher

In applying the provisions of Articles 148 and 151, teachers, professors, and
persons charged with the supervision of public or duly recognized private schools,
colleges and universities and lawyers in the actual performance of their duties or on
the occasion of such performance, shall be deemed a person in authority.

Agent: is one who, by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment

by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and property. (Example. Barrio councilman and any
person who comes to the aid of the person in authority, policeman, municipal
treasurer, postmaster, sheriff, agents of the BIR, Malacaang confidential agent)

Even when the person in authority or the agent agrees to fight, still direct
assault.
When the person in authority or the agent provoked/attacked first, innocent
party is entitled to defend himself and cannot be held liable for assault or
resistance nor for physical injuries, because he acts in legitimate self-defense

The offended party in assault must not be the aggressor. If there is unlawful
aggression employed by the public officer, any form of resistance which may be in
the nature of force against him will be considered as an act of legitimate defense.
(People vs. Hernandez, 59 Phil. 343)

There can be no assault upon or disobedience to one authority by another when

they both contend that they were in the exercise of their respective duties.

The offender and the offended party are both public officers. The Supreme Court
said that assault may still be committed, as in fact the offender is even subjected to
a greater penalty (U.S. vs. Vallejo, 11 Phil. 193).

When assault is made by reason of the performance of his duty there is no need
for actual performance of his official duty when attacked

In direct assault of the first form, the stature of the offended person is immaterial.
The crime is manifested by the spirit of lawlessness.

In the second form, you have to distinguish a situation where a person in authority
or his agent was attacked while performing official functions, from a situation when
he is not performing such functions.
If attack was done during the exercise of official functions, the crime is always
direct assault. It is enough that the offender knew that the person in authority
was performing an official function whatever may be the reason for the attack,
although what may have happened was a purely private affair.

On the other hand, if the person in authority or the agent was killed when no longer
performing official functions, the crime may simply be the material consequence of
he unlawful act: murder or homicide. For the crime to be direct assault, the attack
must be by reason of his official function in the past. Motive becomes important in
this respect. Example, if a judge was killed while resisting the taking of his watch,
there is no direct assault.

In the second form of direct assault, it is also important that the offended knew that
the person he is attacking is a person in authority or an agent of a person in
authority, performing his official functions. No knowledge, no lawlessness or
contempt.

For example, if two persons were quarreling and a policeman in civilian clothes
comes and stops them, but one of the protagonists stabs the policeman, there
would be no direct assault unless the offender knew that he is a policeman.

In this respect it is enough that the offender should know that the offended party
was exercising some form of authority. It is not necessary that the offender knows
what is meant by person in authority or an agent of one because ignorantia legis
non excusat.

Circumstances qualifying the offense (Qualified Assault):

a. when the assault is committed with a weapon
b. when the offender is a public officer or employee
c. when the offender lays hand upon a person in authority

Complex crime of direct assault with homicide or murder, or with serious

physical injuries.

If the crime of direct assault is committed with the use of force and it resulted in the
infliction of slight physical injuries, the latter shall not be considered as a separate
offense. It shall be absorbed by the greater crime of direct assault. (People vs.
Acierto, 57 Phil. 614)

Direct assault cannot be committed during rebellion.

May direct assault be committed upon a private individual? Yes. When a

private person comes to the aid of a person in authority, and he is likewise
assaulted. Under Republic Act No. 1978,
a private person who comes to the aid of a person in authority is by fiction of law
deemed or is considered an agent of a person in authority.

Human Security Act of 2007

Terrorism.- Any person who commits an act punishable under any of the predicate
crimes in this law thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the
government to give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment, without
the benefit of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the
Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.

SEC. 4. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism. - Persons who conspire to commit the

crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment.

There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning

the commission of the crime of terrorism as defined in Section 3 hereof and decide
to commit the same.

Article 116
MISPRISION OF TREASON

ELEMENTS:
a. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the government,
and not a foreigner
b. That he has knowledge of any conspiracy (to commit treason)
against the government
That he conceals or does not disclose and make known the same as
soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province or the mayor or
fiscal of the city in which he resides

Article 157
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

ELEMENTS :
a. That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
b. That he is serving his sentence which consists in deprivation of
liberty (destierro included)
c. That he evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the
term if his sentence. (fact of return immaterial).

By the very nature of the crime, it cannot be committed when the prisoner
involved is merely a detention prisoner. But it applies to persons convicted by
final judgment with a penalty of destierro.

A detention prisoner even if he escapes from confinement has no criminal liability.

Thus, escaping from his prison cell when his case is still on appeal does not make
said prisoner liable for Evasion of Service of Sentence.
 In leaving or escaping from jail or prison, that the prisoner immediately
returned is immaterial. It is enough that he left the penal
establishment by escaping therefrom. His voluntary return may only be
mitigating, being analogous to voluntary surrender. But the same will
not absolve his criminal liability.
A continuing offense.
Offenders not minor delinquents nor detention prisoners
If escaped within the 15 day appeal period no evasion
No applicable to deportation as the sentence
The crime of evasion of service of sentence may be committed even if
the sentence is destierro, and this is committed if the convict
sentenced to destierro will enter the prohibited places or come within
the prohibited radius of 25 kilometers to such places as stated in the
judgment.

If the sentence violated is destierro, the penalty upon the convict is to be served by
way of destierro also, not imprisonment. This is so because the penalty for the
evasion can not be more severe than the penalty evaded.

Circumstances qualifying the offense (done thru):

a. unlawful entry (by scaling)
b. breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or floors
c. using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or intimidation
d. connivance with other convicts or employees of the penal institution

A, a foreigner, was found guilty of violation of the law, and was ordered by the court
to be deported. Later on, he returned to the Philippines in violation of the sentence.
Held: He is not guilty of Evasion of Service of Sentence as the law is not applicable
to offenses executed by deportation. (U.S. vs. Loo Hoe, 36 Phil. 867).
Article 155
ALARMS AND SCANDALS

TYPES:
a. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosive
within any town or public place, calculated to cause alarm or danger
b. Instigating or taking active part in any charivari or other disorderly
meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to public tranquility
c. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while
engaged in any other nocturnal amusement
d. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places while
intoxicated or otherwise, provided the act is not covered by Art 153
(tumult).

Understand the nature of the crime of alarms and scandals as one that
disturbs public tranquility or public peace. If the annoyance is intended
for a particular person, the crime is unjust vexation.

Charivari mock serenade or discordant noises made with kettles, tin horns etc,
designed to deride, insult or annoy
When a person discharges a firearm in public, the act may constitute any of
the possible crimes under the Revised Penal Code:
(1) Alarms and scandals if the firearm when discharged was not directed to any
particular person;
(2) Illegal discharge of firearm under Article 254 if the firearm is directed or
pointed to a particular person when discharged but intent to kill is absent;
(3) Attempted homicide, murder, or parricide if the firearm when discharged is
directed against a person and intent to kill is present.

In this connection, understand that it is not necessary that the offended party be
wounded or hit. Mere discharge of firearm towards another with intent to kill
already amounts to attempted homicide or attempted murder or attempted
parricide. It can not be frustrated because the offended party is not mortally
wounded.

In Araneta v. Court of Appeals, it was held that if a person is shot at and is

wounded, the crime is automatically attempted homicide. Intent to kill is
inherent in the use of the deadly weapon.

(4) Grave Threats If the weapon is not discharged but merely

pointed to another

(5) Other Light Threats If drawn in a quarrel but not in self defense

What governs is the result, not the intent

CRIME Nature of Crime Who are Liable

Tumults and other Crime against Public Order Private persons,
Disturbances (153) outsider
Alarms and Scandals (155) Crime against Public Order Private persons,
outsider

Article 156
DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAILS

ELEMENTS :
a. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal establishment.
b. That the offender removes therefor such person, or helps the escape
of such person (if the escapee is serving final judgement, he is guilty of
evasion of sentence).
c. Offender is a private individual

Article 134
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

ELEMENTS:
 a. That there be
1. public uprising and
2. taking arms against the government (force/violence)

b. That the purpose of the uprising or movement is either

1. to remove from the allegiance to said government or its laws
1 i. the territory of the Philippines or any part thereof, or
2 ii. any body of land, naval or other armed forces, or

2 To deprive the chief executive or congress, wholly or partially, of

any of their powers or prerogatives
POLITICAL CRIMES are those directly aimed
against the political order, as well as such common
crimes as may be committed to achieve a political
purpose. The decisive factor is the intent or motive.

Treason Rebellion Coup detat Sedition

(114) (134) (134-A) (139)
Nature of Crime Crime against Crime against Crime against
Crime against Public Order Public Order Public Order
National
Security
Overt Acts levying war Public uprising See article. Rising
against the AND publicly or
govt; Taking up arms tumultuously
OR against the (caused by
adherence govt more than 3
and giving armed men or
aid or provided with
comfort to means of
enemies violence)
Purpose of Deliver the alienate the Seizing or See
objective govt to allegiance of a diminishing state enumeration
enemy people in a power. in article.
during war territory,
whether wholly
or partially,
from the duly
constituted
government