Saint Ferdinand College

College of Criminology
City of Ilagan, Isabela

EXPANDED TERTIARY EDUCATION EQUIVALENCY AND

ACCREDITATION PROGRAM (ETEEAP)

MODULE IN CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 1

(CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE)

Presented in these document are outline of course topic

references that serves as study guide in answering practical or
situational case analysis provided in the three learning modules.

The learning modules are found in the Compilation One: A

Compiled ETEEAP Materials in Criminal Jurisprudence, Procedure and
Evidence ... as the main reference.

Competencies : The ETEEAP Beneficiary shall be able to:

1. Know the concept and characteristics of criminal law and
criminal liability
2. Define felonies and determine stages of execution
3. Determine circumstances affecting criminal liability and
identifying persons liable for felonies
4. Know the concept of penalties and extinction and concept of
criminal and civil liabilities
5. Know the special criminal statutes
 Criminal Law, Book I

Course Topic Reference

MODULE I

GENERAL PROVISIONS OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE

PART 1

Classifications of Felonies:
1. According to manner or mode of execution: (Art. 3)
2. According to Gravity: (Art. 9)
3. According to stage of execution: (Art. 6)
4. How to Properly Determine the Stage of Execution:

PART II

Incurrence of Criminal Liability:

Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code provides how criminal liability shall
be incurred
Conspiracy and Proposal to commit a Felony

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MODULE I

1. A saw B lying down whom he thought was only sleeping. With

intent to kill, A shot B for three consecutive times using a .45
caliber firearm. It turned out that B was dead an hour ago due to a
snake bite.

Under existing laws, A cannot be held liable for the death of

B (murder) obviously because B was already dead at the time A
intended to kill him.

Question:
As a police officer what criminal charge are you going to file
against A taking into account his unlawful actuation showing the
propensity to be a criminal were it not for the impossibility of its
accomplishment? Explain.

Answer:
A can only be charged of an impossible crime with the penalty
of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos because of
the inherent impossibility (physical and legal) of its
accomplishment.
 As stated in the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines,
criminal liability shall be incurred by any person performing an act
which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not
for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account
of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means and such act
should not constitute a violation of another provision of Revised
Penal Code.

In committing an impossible crime, the offender intends to

commit a felony against person or a felony against property, and the
act performed would have been an offense against person and
property, but, a felony is not actually committed because of the legal
and physical impossibility of accomplishing the intended act.

In crime against person as would have been in this case, it is

necessary that the victim could be injured or killed, and in this case
a dead person cannot be injured or killed, therefor, there is no crime
committed.

2. A, B and C conspired to rape X. For one week the three (3)

tried to observe X in order to discover her schedules. They came
to learn that she goes home very 10:00 PM all alone passing through
a dark alley. One night, the three decided to wait for X to pass by in
order to proceed with their plan to rape her. While waiting however
they brought with them a bottle of wine. The three got drank reason
for which they were not able to realize their plan.

Question:
Did they commit any crime? Justify your answer by explaining
the concept of conspiracy and proposal.

Answer:
No. As a rule, conspiracy and proposal to commit a crime are
not punishable by law because they are only preparatory acts, and
the law regards them as innocent or at least permissible, except, in
cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor such as
conspiracy and proposal to commit treason, conspiracy and
proposal to commit rebellion, and conspiracy and proposal to
commit sedition.

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an

agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to
commit it. As a rule, when conspiracy exists, the degree of
participation of each conspirator is not considered because the act
of one is the act of all, they have equal criminal responsibility.
 The exception, even though there was conspiracy, if a co-
conspirator merely cooperated in the commission of the crime with
insignificant or minimal acts, such that even without his
cooperation, the crime could be carried out as well, such co-
conspirator should be punished as an accomplice only.

There are two kinds of conspiracy: (1) Conspiracy as a

crime, means the mere conspiracy is the crime itself. This is only
true when the law expressly punishes the mere conspiracy,
otherwise, the conspiracy does not bring about the commission of
the crime because conspiracy is not an overt act but a mere
preparatory act, and (2) Conspiracy as a basis of incurring
criminal liability. When the conspiracy is only a basis of incurring
criminal liability, there must be an overt act done before the co-
conspirators become criminally liable.

The rule on this is, as long as he appeared in the scene of the

crime, he is liable as a co-conspirator, except:

1. If he is a mastermind, he does not have to be in the scene of

the crime to be co-conspirator, and
2. If he performs an overt act in the performance of the
conspiracy, even if it is not in the scene of the crime per se (like the
driver of a get-away car who planned the crime as well, or the man
who pressed the button of a remote control bomb and the bomb
exploded a few streets away.

Take note, conspiracy must be proven on the same quantum of

evidence as the felony subject of the agreement of the parties. It
may be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence consisting of
acts, words, or conduct of the alleged conspirators prior to, during
and after the commission of the felony to achieve a common design
or purpose.

While in Proposal, it exists when the person who has decided

to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.

There is proposal when the person who has decided to

commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or
persons. It is true only up to the point where the party to whom the
proposal was made has not yet accepted the proposal.

3. Explain how to determine the frustrated and attempted stage of the

following crimes:

a. Murder
 For Attempted:

Answer:
The crime is not committed absent of these requisites
although theres a criminal intent but it was not performed at all.

(1) Person was killed;

(2) Accused killed him;
(3) Killing attended by any of the following
qualifying circumstances.
(a) with treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or
of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity;
(b) in consideration of a price, reward or
promise;
(c) by means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin;
(d) on occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or
of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano

For Frustrated:

In frustrated, the accused is intended to kill the victim and

the attack was qualified by those circumstances mentioned
above, but the victim survived and recovered from the wound
inflicted by the offender being the result of prompt medical
attention.

b. Robbery with force upon things

For Attempted:

Answer:
Under Article 299 of the Revised Penal Code, there are two
kinds of Robbery with force upon things. Absent of these
elements mentioned below constitutes attempted robbery.

A.
1. Offender entered an inhabited house, or public building, or
edifice devoted to religious worship.
2. Entrance was effected by any of the following means:
 a. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress;
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or
window;
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools, or
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority.
3. Once inside the building, the offender took personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain.

B.
1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public building or edifice
devoted to religious worship, regardless of circumstances under
which he entered it

2. Offender takes personal property belonging to another, with

intent to gain, under any of the following circumstances:
a. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle, or door.
b. By taking such furniture or objects away to be broken

For Frustrated:

Answer:
While some of the requisites mentioned above are presents,
failure of the malefactor to take the personal property of the victim
with intent to gain constitutes a frustrated robbery.

c. Theft
For Attempted:

Answer:
The theft to consummate, (1) there is taking of personal
property, (2) property taken belongs to another, (3) taking was
done with intent to gain, and (4) taking was done without the
consent of the owner.

Without the unlawful taking as an act of execution, the offense

is only attempted.

For Frustrated:

Answer:
There is no crime of frustrated theft as held by the Supreme
Court in the case of Valenzuela versus People, et al., G.R. No. 160188,
June 21, 2007.
d. Rape
For Attempted:

Answer:
In attempted rape, there is intent to effect sexual cohesion,
although unsuccessful and failed to met all these requisites of
rape:
1. Offender (by any person) commits an act of sexual
assault,
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of the
following means:
a. By inserting his penis into another persons mouth or
anal orifice, or
b. By inserting any instrument or object into the genital or
anal orifice of another person
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under any of
the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation, or
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious, or
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abused of
authority, or
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or demented.

For Frustrated:

Answer:
There is no crime of frustrated rape. The slightest penetration
of penis into the labia of the female organ consummates the
crime of rape. However, mere touching alone of the genitals and
mons pubis or the pudendum can only be considered as
attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness.
 Criminal Law, Book I

Course Topic Reference

MODULE II

CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY

There are five circumstances affecting criminal liability. These are:

1. Justifying Circumstances
2. Exempting Circumstances
3. Mitigating Circumstances
4. Aggravating Circumstances
5. Alternative Circumstances

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MODULE II

Problems:

1. X was found dead with both hands tied on a pole. His body
sustained 14 stab wounds and 24 incised wounds. The suspect is no
other than Y, the brother of X. Y is an ex-convict having been
imprisoned for 8 years for a crime of Homicide. Investigation
further disclose that a week ago, Y deliberately planned how to
kill his brother and that on the night he executed his plan, he
purposely drank wine to make himself brave.

With the foregoing facts, enumerate all the possible

circumstances that aggravated the crime committed by Y. Explain.

Answer:
A. X was tied on a pole with his both hands. If X was not tied on a
pole, he could have chance to defend himself from the attack of
his brother, and the wounds he sustained could probably lessen.
The offender employed means, methods or forms in its execution
which tend directly and especially to ensure its execution,
without risk to himself or herself arising from any defense which
the offended party might make.
B. The malefactor is the brother of the victim. Being a member
of the family, and a brother, theres no way for X to have doubt
towards his brother and to find out if Y has intention to kill him
absent of any motives, warnings from other family members or
friends.
C. The victim sustained multiple stab wounds while his both
hands were tied on a pole. The crime of murder was
consummated with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim. The situation is so
inhumane and cruel X being stabbed repeatedly by his own
 brother while being tied and didnt have any chance to defend
himself.

2. A killed B, thereafter, A voluntarily surrendered to the PNP.

Upon his surrender, he explained that he indeed killed B but it was
in defense of a relative. He explained that B attacked his brother
thus he was forced to kill him to defend his brother.

With the foregoing allegations of A, will you still file a case

against him? Explain your answer.

Answer:
No. As long as the act committed was being proven and
justified with certainty by sufficient, satisfactory and convincing
evidence that excludes any vestige of criminal aggression on the
part of the person invoking it, theres no crime to speak of. This
situation falls under the recognized justifying circumstances as self-
defense.

As stated in the Revised Penal Code, anyone who acts in

defense of the person or rights of his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters,
or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first
and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding
circumstance are present, and the further requisite, in case the
revocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making
defense had no part therein.
 Criminal Law, Book I

Course Topic Reference

MODULE III

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES

Persons Criminally Liable:

I. The Principals
II. The Accomplices
III. The Accessories

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR MODULE III

1. A, B, C and D conspired with each other to kill X. All

proceeded to the house of X but before reaching the same, D,
pretending to answer a call of nature went out of the way and did
not join A, B and C anymore, when the three killed X.

Question: Can D be held liable for the death of X? Reason out.

No. Mere knowledge, acquiescence, or approval of the act

without cooperation or agreement to cooperate is not enough to
constitute one a party to a crime, but that there must be intentional
participation in the commission of the crime. In order to hold D
guilty either as principal or accomplice, it must be established that
he performed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, either by
actively participating in the actual commission of the crime, or by
lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at
the scene of the crime, or by exerting moral ascendancy over the
rest of the conspirators as to move them to executing the conspiracy.

2. X shot A resulting to his death. Y, a friend of X wanted to help

the latter so he took the weapon and placed it in the hand of the
deceased to make it appear that the victim committed suicide.

Question: Is Y criminally liable? Explain.

Answer:
Yes, Y is criminally liable as an accessory to the crime made by
X.

As stated in the Revised Penal Code, accessories are those

who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without
having participated therein, either as principals or accomplish, take
part subsequent to its commission x x x by concealing or destroying
 the body of the crime or the effects or instruments thereof, in order
to prevent its discovery.

In this case and as held in the case of People vs. Saladino, the
taking of the weapon and placing it in the hand of the deceased to
make it appear that the victim committed suicide clearly illustrate
what the law provides destroying the body of the crime.

3. A approached B, borrowing the latters gun, telling him that he

(A) is going to kill X. B, knowing As criminal design lent his gun
with which A shot and killed X.

Question: What is the degree of participation of B in the murder

of X?

Answer:
B can be held liable as an accomplice in the crime committed
by A.

As stated in the Revised Penal Code, accomplice is the person

who cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts. And in order that a person may be considered an
accomplice, these requisites must by present:
1. Concurs with the criminal design of the principal by direct
participation;
2. Cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts, with the intention of supplying material
or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious
way.

In this case, B, knowing of the criminal design of A; lent his

gun and permitted A in killing X. Thus, B is liable as an accomplice.
The cooperation which the law punishes is the assistance which is
knowingly or intentionally given and which is not possible without
previous knowledge of the crime purpose.

4. A hired B for a price of P100, 000.00 in order to kill John. B

then went to his cousin, C to borrow his .45 caliber gun. C,
knowing the criminal intent of his cousin lent his firearm.
Thereafter, B proceeded to look for John and saw him walking in a
dark alley. He suddenly shot John using the firearm he borrowed
from his cousin, C.

D happened to pass by and saw John with a gunshot wound.

Since John is likewise his enemy, he kick him saying that he deserve
what happened to him.
 John subsequently died due to gunshot wound he sustained
from B. One week later, E learned about the incident. Since B is
his best friend, E offered his rest house in Laguna to B who has
an outstanding warrant of arrest for murder, so that the police
officers could not locate him.

Question: Give the criminal responsibility or degree of participation

of A, B, C, D and E in the crime of murder. Justify your
answer.

Answer:
A, although he did not actually participate in the killing of
John, is considered a principal in the crime committed because he
directly inducing B, by offering a reward money, to kill John.

B, who took the direct part in the execution of the crime

committed by personally killing John, is also a principal in this case.

C is the accomplice in this case because knowing of the

criminal design of his cousin B he still lent his gun and permitted in
killing John.

D is not liable as co-conspirator because there was no

concerted action between him and B. There was no unity of purpose
and intention immediately before the commission of the crime.
Hence, D should be held answerable only for his individual act.

E is an accessory in the crime when he assisted B to escape

from his liability by offering his resthouse so that the authority
could not locate B.