Bosaing, Christian A.

LESSON 1:

1. If piracy was committed outside the Philippine waters, will the Philippine
courts have jurisdiction over the offense?

No, if piracy was committed outside the Philippine waters, the Philippine
courts have no jurisdiction over the offense in which it is not on the
jurisdiction of the Philippines. In addition, jurisdiction is with any courts where
offenders are found or arrested.

2. Comment on the newly enacted Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Base your

discussions on the rights laid down by the constitution as well as your
knowledge on penal laws.

For me the newly enacted Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 would result for the
betterment of our country. Even though the newly act violates some of the
rights of human like the rights of a detainee in which according to the said act,
detention without judicial warrant of arrest is accepted. In addition, the act has
the intention of better security of the country against terrorism.

3. X, a known bugaw, furnished or prostituted women to the enemy during

war. Does the act constitute treason?

The act committed by X which he furnished or prostitute women to the

enemy during war is still an act of treason, because he adheres to the enemies
in giving them aid and comfort or by giving them something that will help their
satisfaction or their urge.

LESSON 2:

1. X, a police officer, was walking around Samoki. He saw A and he

remembered that when they were in high school, he was severely bullied by A.
without any hesitation, he drew his gun at A and handcuffed him. He then
delivered A to the police station and told his fellow policemen that A took a bolo
and chased after him. He said that A was mad because Shirley, his wife, used
to be A’s ex-girlfriend. A stayed at the custody of the police for two days and
was only released when X made him kneel, ask for forgiveness and admit that
X is most handsome man in Samoki. What crime/s, if any, did X commit?

The crime that X commit is that illegal detention in which, X detained A

without legal grounds or probable cause. Moreover, A has not committed any
crime or no reasonable ground of suspicion that he has committed a crime.

2. B, a suspected pusher lives in a condominium unit. Agents of the PDEA

obtained a search warrant but the name of the person in the search warrant
did not tally with the address indicated therein. Eventually, B was found but in
a different address. B resisted but the agents insisted on the search. Is the
search valid?

The search would be invalid in the reason that B was found not indicated
on the search warrant or in a different address. In addition, the particular
description of the address written in the warrant must be the same on the
address that should be searched.
Bosaing, Christian A.

3. On May 1, 2020 or labor day, Gabriella applied for permit to hold a rally at
the Quirino Grandstand. Their application, however, was denied by Mayor Isko
Moreno by reason of public health since COVID-19 is feared to spread if the
rally shall push through. You have a friend from Gabriella and she asked you
asked if they can charge Yorme for prohibition, interruption and dissolution of
peaceful meetings under ART. 131 of the RPC. What would be your advice?

My advice would be, they should file charges against Yorme for not
permitting them to hold a rally at the Quirino Grandstand. By reason of
hindering the permit not to be, push through without legal grounds and that if
they have the intention of a peaceful assembly.

4. A is a well-known arms dealer. He sells guns and ammunitions to gangs,

fraternities and even to the NPA. The police have been tailing him for quite
some time and they were able to identify one of his shops. They procured a
search warrant on the said shop and the warrant includes the things to be
seized as guns, explosives and ammunitions. When the police entered the
shop, they were able to seize high powered guns and ammunition. Aside from
that, however, they fund blocks of marijuana and at least 12 kilos of what they
believed to be shabu. Cases were filed against A and the police included a case
for the violation of the dangerous drugs act. Are the police correct in filing a
case for the violation of the comprehensive dangerous drug act? Are the seized
drugs admissible as evidence in court?

Yes, the police are correct in filing a case for the violation of the
comprehensive dangerous act but he would be charged that not goes with the
charge of possessing guns and ammunitions. No, the seized drugs are not
admissible as evidence in court, because the drugs are not indicated on what is
on the search warrant in which only guns and ammunitions are only specified
on the warrant.

5. The mayor of the City of Manila wanted to make the city free from
prostitution. He ordered certain prostituted to be transferred to Davao, without
observing due process since they have not been charged with any crime at all.
What crime was committed by Mayor?

The crime committed by Mayor is expulsion for the reason that he

expelled the prostituted to Davao without authorization to do so by law.

LESSON 2:

1. The group named APK have been planning to overthrow the DU30
government since 2016. They made a planned, surprise attack at the
Malacanang Palace, the Supreme Court and the Batasang Pambansa Complex
on September 11, 2020. They killed at least 30 members of the PNP, 10 PNP
and 16 employees. X, a member APK, was one of the assailants at the Batasang
Pambansa Complex. When they stormed the complex, X saw that some of the
employees left their bags and other belongings while fleeing the complex. While
other members were busy attacking the complex, X got all the time he needed
to collect purses, wallets and phones. Luckily, the combined forces of Police
Bosaing, Christian A.

and AFP were able to subdue APK. What crime/s did the group committed?
Can the crime of robbery committed by X be absorbed?

The crime/s the group did commit is rebellion, which they had violently
attack against the government and for the reason that they want to overthrow
the government by force. Yes, the crime of robbery committed by X can be
absorbed due to violently getting the bags and other belongings of the employee
who was frightened.

2. Mr. De Guzman’s son was shot 12 times for being tagged as a drug pusher
during the oplan double barrel. Mr. De Guzman insisted on his son’s innocence
and filed a case in court against the Police. During the trial, the police were not
able to produce evidence supporting their claim that De Guzman’s son was
“nanlaban” or that he fired against the cops apprehending him and their
evidence of him pushing drugs was lacking. The policemen were then found to
be guilty of murder and planting of evidence. Mr. De Guzman’s grieving heart
cannot move on and still cannot take the death of his son. One night, he went
out to the streets, with the placard saying “DU30 wala kang awa”. Mr. De
Guzman was apprehended and a case for inciting to sedition was filed against
him. Was the case against Mr. De Guzman proper?

The case against Mr. De Guzman was not proper because there is no
disturbance or violation of public peace or order but he only wrote it in a
placard just to show his expression due to what happened to his son.

3. Read about the Oakwood Mutiny of 2003. Discuss why the acts made by
Trillanes and his company are considered to be a coup d’etat.

The acts made by Trillanes and his company are considered to be coup
d’etat because Trillanes and his company which are members of the military
took over the Oakwood Premier in Ayala Center to protest the alleged
corruption in the administration of then-president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.

4. Ressa, the owner of Rappler, allegedly wrote malicious article against

President Duterte. Based on what you’ve read and learned, discuss how she
may be convicted of inciting to sedition by using the elements of the law.

Ressa may be convicted of inciting sedition because she somehow wrote

articles that are malicious in which he labelled President Duterte as a wealthy
Philippine businessman to murder, smuggling, drug dealing and human
trafficking that can cause a decrease to the people in supporting the
government.

5. During the coup d’ etat, soldiers were given food and water by the people
believing for the worthy causes of the soldiers. Hence, soldiers loyal to the
government arrested them. Did the supporters commit any crime? Explain
your answer.

Yes, the supporters still committed a crime of rebellion for being

participants, in which they still supported the soldiers by giving them food and
water.
Bosaing, Christian A.

LESSON 3:

1. Congressman X has a standing warrant of arrest for the crime of murder for
allegedly killing his own bodyguard when the latter found out that X was
plundering money. While on his way to the Batasang Pambansa Complex for
the regular session, police officers served the warrant and arrested him.
Congressman X then filed a case against the Police Officers for violation of
parliamentary immunity under Art. 145 of the RPC. Will the case prosper?

No, the case will not prosper for the reason that a warrant was served
before the regular session in Batasang Pambansa Complex begin. In addition,
it will not still prosper because the crime of murder that he committed has a
higher penalty than prision mayor.

2. A meeting was called by Mayor O and was attended by municipal officials.

While the meeting was on going, X, a drunkard who has a grudge against the
mayor entered the hall where the meeting was being conducted and started
shouting. Can X be held liable under Article 144? Explain your answer.

Yes, X can be held liable under Article 144, because of shouting or noise
barrage while a meeting of officials is being conducted.

LESSON 3:

In 2019, Secretary Ano made a statement calling for the revival of RA 1700 also
known as the Anti-subversion Law in order to counter the recruitment of
communist rebels among Filipino youths. As earlier discussed, RA 1700 was
the law which made the Communist Party of the Philippines illegal but it was
later on repealed in the year 1992 during the administration of former
President Fidel Ramos when he began the peace process with the CPP-NPA.

Repeal the revival of RA 1700 also known as the Anti-Subversion Law

should be again that it should be legal again to counter the Communist Party
of the Philippines. I should say that it should be restated or be legalized again
to cope with continuing menace to the freedom and security of the country. In
addition, the Communist Party of the Philippines is illegal because they are
considered as illegal associations in which they present and clear grave danger
to the peace and security of the country. Moreover, we all know that CPP0-NPA
is considered as members of the Communist Party that was established to
overthrow the government not only by force but also deceit, subversion and
illegal means of action.

LESSON 4:

1. Reynald is a police officer who is on a vacation leave. One day, at 4:30 in the
morning, he was about to go on his early morning jog when he noticed that a
man was trying to forcibly open his neighbor’s window. He shouted at the man
who then jumped from the balcony, pointed a knife at Reynald and slashed his
arms. Luckily, the other neighbors heard the commotion. One neighbor
directed his flashlight towards the assailant and they easily identified him as
Bosaing, Christian A.

Jan Ryan, a notorious member of Akyat Bahay Gang. By the neighborhood’s

effort, Jan Ryan was apprehended. Reynald then filed a case for direct assault
against Jan Ryan. Jan Ryan, however, did not know that Reynald was a police
officer.

a. Will the case prosper? Explain your answer.

No, the case will not prosper because the offender did not know that he
allegedly attacked an officer who is on vacation that is stated on Article 148 for
Direct Assault that is not liable.

b. Assuming that your answer in letter A is NO, what crime should be filed
against Jan Ryan?

If my answer was no, the crime that should be file against Jan Ryan is
physical injury.

c. Suppose Jan Ryan knew that Reynald was a police officer. Will the case for
direct assault prosper?

Yes, if Jan Ryan knew that Reynald was a police officer the case of direct
assault prospers because, Reynald who is an officer engaged in the actual
performance which he apprehended Jan Ryan.

d. Should a case for direct assault stand even if Reynald was on vacation at the
time of the commission of the crime?

No, the case for direct assault will not stand even if Reyanld was on
vacation at the time of the commission of the crime because the offender does
not know that he attacked an officer who is on vacation.

2. Evelyn and Claudine are public school teachers. Evelyn’s son is a student of
Claudine. While classes was on going, Evelyn confronted Claudine after
learning from his son that Claudine called him “sissy”. Evelyn slapped
Claudine in the cheek and pushed her, thereby causing her to fall and hit a
wall divider. As a result of Evelyn’s violent assault, Claudine suffered a
contusion. What crime, if any, is Evelyn liable?

Evelyn is liable with the crime of physical injury for the reason that
Evelyn had done the action by mere revenge because of Claudine calling her
“sissy.”

3. Smith was driving his new Cadillac along the National highway. Afraid to
scratch his new car, he was running at 20kms/hr. Vladimir, a barangay
Chairman, is a long-time nemesis of Smith. Jealous of Smith’s new car,
Vladimir made Smith stop his vehicle and said that he was over speeding.
Vladimir then insisted to confiscate Smith’s driver’s license but Smith refused
and just drove away. Vladimir filed a case against Smith for resistance and
disobedience to a person in authority or his agents under art. 151. Will the
case prosper?
Bosaing, Christian A.

No, the case will not prosper, but the case that should be filed is direct
assault in the reason that Smith refused to hand over his driver’s license when
Vladimir required it.

LESSON 4:

1. Kneejune, a detention prisoner, was taken to a hospital for emergency

medical treatment. His followers, all of whom were armed, went to the hospital
to take him away or help him escape. The prison guards, seeing that they were
outnumbered and that resistance would endanger the lives of other patients,
deckled to allow the prisoner to be taken by his followers. What crime, if any,
was committed by A’s followers? Why?

The crime committed by A’s followers was tumults and other

disturbances of public disorder ART. 153 in which the followers intended to
take A away from the hospital that can cause serious disturbances in private
places where public functions or performance are being held.

2. Sedrick killed his wife under exceptional circumstances and was sentenced
by the RTC of Dagupan City to suffer the penalty of destierro during which he
was not to enter the city. While serving sentence, Sedrick went to Dagupan City
to visit his mother. Later, he was arrested in Manila. What crime did Manny
commit? Explain your answer using the elements of the crime.

The crime committed by Sedrick is evasion by escaping during the term

of sentence under ART. 157 which he violated his sentence that he should not
enter the city. In addition, he evades the service of his sentence by entering the
city or the place he is prohibited while he is still serving his sentence.