Section 1. Checks Without Sufficient Funds. - Any Person Who Makes or Draws and Issues
Section 1. Checks Without Sufficient Funds. - Any Person Who Makes or Draws and Issues
Section 1. Checks Without Sufficient Funds. - Any Person Who Makes or Draws and Issues
A may be held liable for estafa under 315 of the RPC and BP 22 or the bouncing checks
law for such act. The bouncing of the check showed that there is evidence of guilt and
likewise damage or prejudice on the part of B. Thus, making A liable for estafa under
Article 315. In BP 22, the mere issuance of a worthless check is already prima facie to
hold A liable.
Section 1. Checks without sufficient funds. - Any person who makes or draws and issues
any check to apply on account or for value, knowing at the time of issue that he does not
have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment of such check in full
upon its presentment, which check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for
insufficiency of funds or credit or would have been dishonored for the same reason had not
the drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the bank to stop payment, shall be punished
by…
2. The other acts considered under Anti Rape Law of 1997 is that provided for under
subsection “b” when the offender is any person who made a sexual attack against another
person by (a) inserting his penis to the mouth, or anal orifice of the person or (b) inserting
any instrument or object into the genital, anal orifice of another person.
"1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
following circumstances:
"a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
"b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
"c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
"d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even
though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
"2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1
hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another
person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal
orifice of another person.
Yes, the subsequent marriage of the offender and the offender party will extinguish the
criminal action and or the penalty imposed because such action amount to pardon of the
offended party. However, such marriage will only extinguish the penalty imposed upon
the principal (or the one the woman married) and cannot be extended to co-principals if
there is multiple rape.
"Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. - The subsequent valid marriage between the offended
party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.
3. Samuel is liable for simple theft for taking 24 coconuts without the consent of the owner
(since it was not taken from the premises of a plantation)
Art. 310. Qualified theft. — The crime of theft shall be punished by the penalties next
higher by two degrees than those respectively specified in the next preceding article, if
committed by a domestic servant, or with grave abuse of confidence, or if the property
stolen is motor vehicle, mail matter or large cattle or consists of coconuts taken from the
premises of the plantation or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or if property is taken
on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic erruption, or any other calamity,
vehicular accident or civil disturbance. (As amended by R.A. 120 and B.P. Blg. 71. May
1, 1980).
4. The crime committed by the agent in this case. The agent was given a gold bar and he
misappropriated it for himself.
The essential elements of the crime of theft are as follows: First, the taking of personal
property, second, that the property belongs to another; third, that the taking away be done
with intent of gain; fourth, that the taking away be done without consent of the owner; and
fifth, that the taking away be accomplished without violence or intimidation against persons
or force upon things.
In US vs Nieves de vera, that the crime proven in the cause to have been committed by the
appellant by appropriating the gold bar delivered to her for examination, and by converting to
her own use, without the consent of the owner, the bank notes which had been handed her
to be exchanged for silver coins, is that of theft, defined and punished in article 518,
paragraph 2, of the Penal Code.
In estafa, the subject matter may be real or personal. In theft, only personal.
In estafa, the offender receives the property (material or juridical possession) while in
theft, the offender takes the property without the consent of the owner and without using
threat, intimidation or violence.
ESTAFA THEFT
As to acquisition of Receives the thing from the Takes the thing without the
property offended party owner’s consent
As to possession The acquires the material or The offender acquires the
physical and the juridical material or physical
possession of the thing possession of the thing
(and the misappropriates it)
5. Yes, gambling without betting may be punished as held by jurisprudence where playing
of monte without betting is punishable.
Acts that are punished for betting a sport under the RPC are:
a. By betting on horse racing on periods not allowed by law
b. By maintain or operating a totalizer or other devices for betting or racing
c. Other acts include game fixing, point sharing, game machination, in connection with
the games of basketball etc.
Art. 197. Betting in sports contests. — …bet money or any object or article of value or
representative of value upon the result of any boxing or other sports contests.
Art. 198. Illegal betting on horse race. — … any person who except during the period
allowed by law, shall be on horse races. … any person who, under the same
circumstances, shall maintain or employ a totalizer or other device or scheme for betting
on horse races or realizing any profit therefrom.
For the purposes of this article, any race held in the same day at the same place shall be
held punishable as a separate offense, and if the same be committed by any partnership,
corporation or association, the president and the directors or managers thereof shall be
deemed to be principals in the offense if they have consented to or knowingly tolerated
its commission.
Section 29. Criminal Liability for Planting of Evidence. – Any person who is found guilty of
"planting" any dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical,
regardless of quantity and purity, shall suffer the penalty of death.
The heirs of the victim may file an action against A under article 275 for abandonment of
persons in danger or one’s own victim by not extending any help to the person he hit and
instead run away from him.
Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one's own victim. —
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally
wounded or injured.
The heirs may likewise sue A for Reckless Imprudence resulting to homicide qualified by
failure to attend help to victim which is provided for under the last paragraph under
Article 365 of the RPC on Negligence.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in which
the damage impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.
7. A warrant of arrest is a lifetime warrant meaning that unless the person therein is
arrested, it does not prescribed. A search warrant on the other hand is only good for 10
days.
SEARCH WARRANT WARRANT OF ARREST
CONTENT Order in writing in the Order directed to the peace
name of the RP signed by officer to execute the
the judge and directed to warrant by taking the
the peace officer to search person stated therein into
personal property and bring custody that he may be
it to court bound to answer for the
commission of the offense
PERIOD OF VALIDITY Valid for 10 days only Does not become stale
TIME OF SERVICE To be served only in May be served on any day
daytime unless the affidavit and at any time of the day
alleges that the property is or night
on the person or in the
place to be searched
No, the arrest made by SPO1 Rafael Estella is not lawful because for an arrest to be
lawful there must be a warrant of arrest. If there is none, the act must certify some
conditions under warrantless arrest namely, inflagrante de licto, probable and re-arrest.
Mere suspicion or a person acting suspiciously does not fall in any of the said grounds.
Under the Rules of Court, Rule 113, Section 5, a warrantless arrest, also known as
"citizen’s arrest," is lawful under three circumstances:
1. When, in the presence of the policeman, the person to be arrested has committed, is
actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense. This is the "in flagrante
delicto" rule.
2. When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe,
based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, that the person to be arrested
has committed it. This is the "hot pursuit" arrest rule.
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment.
8. Yes, Robbery may be committed through the execution of deeds and such is done
through violence and intimidation wherein the offender has the intent to defraud another
and the former compels the latter to sign, execute or deliver any public instrument or
document.
Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery. — Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take
any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything shall be guilty of robbery.
Yes, X is also guilty of the crime Robbery with homicide because the formation of a band
qualifies the crime. The only time wherein a person may be exculpated is when he did an
act to prevent the crime from taking place.
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members thereof. — When
more than three armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a band. When any of the arms used in the
commission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm, the penalty to be imposed upon all
the malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law,
without prejudice of the criminal liability for illegal possession of such unlicensed
firearms.
Any member of a band who is present at the commission of a robbery by the band, shall
be punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown
that he attempted to prevent the same.
9. An example of an offense that is not an all time offense is treason since the same cannot
be committed in time of peace. Treason is a war crime and as such, is punished by the
state as a measure of self-defense and self-preservation. There are two ways of
committing treason, one is by levying war and the other is by giving aid and comfort to
the enemy country. The offender in this case must be a Filipino or an alien residing in the
Philippines.
Art. 114. Treason. — Any person who, owing allegiance to the Government of the
Philippine Islands, not being a foreigner, levies war against them or adheres to their
enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere,
The 10 persons committed the crime of qualified piracy in the case at bar which has the
following elements: a) a vessel in the high seas of Philippine seas; b) offenders may or
may not be a member of the complement; c) such offenders attacking or seizing the
vessel and as such were committed or accompanied by murder, homicide, physical
injuries or rape. Such elements being present, the 10 men are all liable as principals in the
crime of qualified piracy.
Art. 122. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas. — The penalty of reclusion
temporal shall be inflicted upon any person who, on the high seas, shall attack or seize a
vessel or, not being a member of its complement nor a passenger, shall seize the whole or
part of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment, or personal belongings of its complement
or passengers.
Art. 123. Qualified piracy. — The penalty of reclusion temporal to death shall be
imposed upon those who commit any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article,
under any of the following circumstances:
1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape
10. A is liable for Theft of a large cattle under Anti-Cattle Rustling Law which has for its
subject matter carabaos and by taking them by means without violence or intimidation or
force upon things.
A is a stranger - liable
B is a son – excused
Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. — No criminal, but only civil liability,
shall result from the commission of the crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief
committed or caused mutually by the following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased
spouse before the same shall have passed into the possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together.
The exemption established by this article shall not be applicable to strangers participating
in the commission of the crime.
No, I will not sustain the defense of the culprit despite the act being “unintentional or
accidental. A similar case was likewise ruled by the court where it applied the rule on
interpretation in favor of the Spanish Codigo Penal which provides that the death by
accident may be complexed and is tantamount to robbery with homicide.
In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of the malefactor is to commit
robbery, with homicide perpetrated on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. The
intent to commit robbery must precede the taking of human life. The homicide may take
place before, during or after the robbery. It is only the result obtained, without reference
or distinction as to the circumstances, causes or modes or persons intervening in the
commission of the crime that has to be taken into consideration. There is no such felony
of robbery with homicide through reckless imprudence or simple negligence. The
constitutive elements of the crime, namely, robbery with homicide, must be
consummated.
It is immaterial that the death would supervene by mere accident; or that the victim of
homicide is other than the victim of robbery, or that two or more persons are killed, or
that aside from the homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or usurpation of authority, is
committed by reason or on the occasion of the crime. Likewise immaterial is the fact that
the victim of homicide is one of the robbers; the felony would still be robbery with
homicide. Once a homicide is committed by or on the occasion of the robbery, the felony
committed is robbery with homicide. All the felonies committed by reason of or on the
occasion of the robbery are integrated into one and indivisible felony of robbery with
homicide. The word "homicide" is used in its generic sense. Homicide, thus, includes
murder, parricide, and infanticide.