This document summarizes Philippine criminal law pertaining to homicide, murder, infanticide, physical injuries, abortion, dueling, mutilation, and rape. It defines these crimes and outlines qualifying circumstances, stages (e.g. frustrated vs attempted), applicable articles of the Revised Penal Code, and key rulings from case law that provide interpretations and clarifications. For example, it notes that rape can be committed by a woman against another woman and outlines what level of resistance is required from the victim according to different court decisions.
This document summarizes Philippine criminal law pertaining to homicide, murder, infanticide, physical injuries, abortion, dueling, mutilation, and rape. It defines these crimes and outlines qualifying circumstances, stages (e.g. frustrated vs attempted), applicable articles of the Revised Penal Code, and key rulings from case law that provide interpretations and clarifications. For example, it notes that rape can be committed by a woman against another woman and outlines what level of resistance is required from the victim according to different court decisions.
This document summarizes Philippine criminal law pertaining to homicide, murder, infanticide, physical injuries, abortion, dueling, mutilation, and rape. It defines these crimes and outlines qualifying circumstances, stages (e.g. frustrated vs attempted), applicable articles of the Revised Penal Code, and key rulings from case law that provide interpretations and clarifications. For example, it notes that rape can be committed by a woman against another woman and outlines what level of resistance is required from the victim according to different court decisions.
This document summarizes Philippine criminal law pertaining to homicide, murder, infanticide, physical injuries, abortion, dueling, mutilation, and rape. It defines these crimes and outlines qualifying circumstances, stages (e.g. frustrated vs attempted), applicable articles of the Revised Penal Code, and key rulings from case law that provide interpretations and clarifications. For example, it notes that rape can be committed by a woman against another woman and outlines what level of resistance is required from the victim according to different court decisions.
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 5
*** MURDER
*Qualifying circumstance must
be specifically sought for by the accused for the purpose of killing (PP vs. Galura, CA 68 OG 3159, cantharides case. Here, if serious physical injuries resulted, crime would be Art. 264) *PD 1613 applies if killing is on the occasion of arson. INFANTICIDE *victim must be less than 3 days old *If victim is expelled and is less than 6 months old, crime is abortion if he was born alive *If child is born dead and offender tried to kill him, offender is guilty of impossible crime. KILLING A PERSON: A. VICTIM IS KILLED: (regardless of intent) -HOMICIDE with or without intent to kill; maybe committed through reckless or simple imprudence; -MURDER if qualifying circumstance/s is/are present -INFANTICIDE if victim is less than 3 days old -PARRICIDE if victim is ascebdant/descendant or legitimate spouse B. VICTIM IS NOT KILLED: 1. without intent to Kill: -Physical injuries: serious, less serious, slight, mutilation
-slander by deed no physical injury but there is public humiliation (slapping to embarrass) -maltreatment
no physical injury nor public humiliation (slapping in a private setting) 2. with intent to Kill: a. fatal injury FRUSTRATED murder, homicide, parricide, infanticide b. non-fatal injury or no injury ATTEMPTED homicide, murder, parricide, infanticide Q: Can there be a crime of Frustrated Homicide through reckless imprudence? A: - No. Frustrated/Attempted Homicide/Murder/Parricide/Infan ticide -Can only be committed when there is intent To kill, hence, it cannot be committed through imprudence. Crimes against persons and use of firearm -for frustrated stage, there must be fatal wound -for attempted stage, the firearm must be fired -for grave threats, threats must be clear -mere drawing of firearm in a quarrel is only Other Light Threats Art. 254 Firearm
Discharge
of
*The firearm is aimed, but there
is no intent to kill. Since it must
be directed to another, it cannot
be committed through imprudence. *Is there a complex crime of discharge of firearm and serious or less serious physical injuries? Yes (Justice Javier) *If only slight physical injuries are inflicted, there are two crimes: discharge and slight physical injuries. (Justice Javier) -Note that discharge of Firearm is a crime under RPC, not under RA 8294, hence can be complexed. Ladjaalam does not apply (RA 10591) ***ABORTION Abortion is the killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the expulsion of the fetus from the maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus. Abortion is not a crime against the mother but against the child Under the Philippine Constitution, the unborn child is protected. Art. 256. Abortion
Art. 257. Unintentional Abortion (maybe committed even if the offender had no knowledge of the pregnancy of the victim, contemplates the use of force by another person, not the woman herself) In Unintentional Abortion, there must be violence, which must be intentionally exerted, but there is no specific intent to cause the abortion. It cannot be committed through intimidation. DUEL
A mere fight as a result of
an agreement is not necessarily a duel because a duel implies an agreement to fight under determined conditions and with the participation and intervention of seconds, who fix such conditions
Both combatants and seconds are punished
Seconds are punished as
accomplices
Intentional
offender must know of the
pregnancy; this specific criminal intent is required in Art. 256 the person liable under this article is the person who caused the abortion. The woman is liable under Art. 258 if she consented.
MUTILATION Mutilation is the looping or the clipping off of some part of the body which is not susceptible to growth again. It must be intentional.
Kinds of Mutilation: a. intentional mutilation by depriving victim, partially or totally, of organ of reproduction b. intentional mutilation by looping off of any part of the body other than reproductive organ. PHYSICAL INJURIES Physical Injuries is a crime. It has no stages
formal
Art. 263 Serious Physical
Injuries -When is serious physical injuries qualified? 1. when it would have been parricide; 2. when it would have been murder. Art. 264. Administering Injurious substances or beverages Art. 265. Less serious physical injuries Art. 266. Slight Physical injuries -Slight physical injuries cannot be complexed with another crime. -If committed against a minor, it is not automatically child abuse under Art. 7610, unless it caused some degree of psychological effect on the minor, or is cruel. (PP vs Araneta) -Intent to kill is not always manifested by utterances. Other overt acts may determine it.
*** RAPE *2 Kinds of Rape: 1.) Carnal Knowledge a. through force, threat intimidation; b. offended is deprived reason; c. fraudulent machination abuse of authority; d. offended part is under 12 old or is demented
or of or yrs
2.) Sexual Assault
o When is consummated:
Rape
PP vs. Dalisay, G.R. No.
133926, Aug 6,2003 ZFull penetration is not required to consummate carnal knowledge, as proof of entrance showing the slightest penetration of the male organ within the Labia or Pudendum of the female organ is sufficient (also PP vs.Jalosjos, Nov. 16, 2001) Thus there can be Rape even if the parties are standing. PP vs Basquez, G.R. 144035, Sept. 27,2001
No.
Penile invasion necessarily entails contact with the labia. Even the briefest of contracts, without laceration of the hymen, is deemed to be rape
May a woman commit Rape?
- Rape by sexual assault may be committed by a woman, against another woman - Rape by sexual intercourse may be committed by a woman, provided that she commits it together with a man. PP vs. dela Torre, G.R. No. 121213, January 13,2004 (also PP vs. Villamala and PP vs. Saba) Degree of required
resistance
PP vs. Gondaway, July 23,
2002 Any physical overt act manifesting resistance in any degree from the victim is admissible as evidence of lack of consent. Tenacious resistance is not required. Neither is determined and persistent physical struggle necessary. (This is a deviation from PP vs. Lago, CA, 46 O.G 1356 which required tenacious resistance and not mere initial reluctance) PP vs. Guttierez, May 9,2003 Physical resistance need not be proved in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and she submits herself, against her will, to the rapists advances because of fear for her life and personal safety.
RAPE Sweetheart theory will be effective as defense only if: 1. there is proof of the fact of being lovers 2. there is compelling evidence that the sex was consented PP vs. Bautista, June 3, 2004 Love is not a license for lust PP vs. Agsaoay, June 3, 2004 Moral character of the victim is immaterial in rape PP vs. Lining, July 11, 2002 The main objective of the accused when the victim was taken to the house of Mila Salvacion was to rape her. Hence, forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape. No complexing here. *Incestuous resistance ascendancy considered force.
rape physical not required, of offender is constructive
*Statutory Rape Consent of
the victim in statutory rape has no bearing because her minority makes her incapable of giving consent. *Distinctions among Acts of Lasciviousness, Attempted Rape, and Unjust Vexation *Baleros vs. People, Feb. 22, 2006
The attempt which the RPC
punishes is that which has a logical connection to a particular, concrete offense, that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts leading directly to its realization and consummation. Absent the unavoidable connection, as where the purpose of the offender is not certain, what obtains is an attempt to commit an indeterminate offense. Overt or external act is some physical activity indicating the intention to commit a particular crime more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its termination , will necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. *Sombilon vs. People, G.R. 177528, Sept. 30, 2009 The term lewd is commonly defined as something indecent or obscene; it is characterized by or intended to excite crude sexual desire. That an accused is entertaining a lewd or unchaste design is necessarily a mental process the existence of which can be inferred by overt acts carrying out such as intended, i.e., by conduct that can only be interpreted as lewd or lascivious.
