Angeles University Foundation Angeles City School of Law

ANGELES UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION

Angeles City
School of Law

CRIMINAL LAW II
2nd Semester, SY 2020
Section: Law 1-B

Exercise 15
TRUE OR FALSE
This exercise consists of Part I and Part II; and involves questions on a rticles of the
Revised Penal Code (RPC), and doctrines related therein. Some of the questions in this exercise
15 have been covered in the past quizzes given in this subject. The purpose of including them in
this exercise is for the student to again read the questions and suggested answers therein so that
they may better remember the subject matters or topics covered in the same.
Print out this exercise using long bond paper. For each said question, determine if the
suggested answer was stated correctly, completely or accurately. If correct, complete and
accurate, state beside the question the word “true” and if not, state the word “false” and state the
correct answer.
Part I
A. Crimes against National Security and Laws of Nations

1. The Royal S.S. Maru, a vessel registered in Panama, was 300 nautical miles
from Aparri, Cagayan when its engines malfunctioned. The Captain
ordered his men to drop anchor and repair the ship. While the officers and
crew were asleep, armed men boarded the vessel and took away several
crates containing valuable items and loaded them in their own motorboat.
Before the band left, they planted an explosive which they detonated from a
safe distance. The explosion damaged the hull of the ship, killed ten (10)
crewmen, and injured fifteen (15) others.
What crime or crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. (2016 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Qualified Piracy under Article 123 of the Revised Penal Code was committed
because all the elements thereof were present, to wit:
(1) the vessel Royal S.S. Maru is on the high seas, or 300 nm away from
Appari, Cagayan; (2) that the offenders are not members of its complement or
passengers thereof; and (3) that the offenders seized equipment from the
vessel, i.e., the crates.
Moreover, the crime was qualified because: (1) the offenders seized the vessel
by boarding; and (2) the crime of piracy was accompanied by murder and
physical injuries.
1
2. What is the crime committed by a public officer who discloses to the
representative of a foreign nation the contents of the articles, data or
information of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine
archipelago which he has in his possession by reason of the public office he
holds? (2012 Bar Question)
a. espionage;
b. disloyalty;
c. treason;
d. violation of neutrality.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Espionage is committed by public officer, who is in possession, by reason

of the public office he holds, of the articles, data, or information of a
confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine Archipelago,
discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation (Article 117 of
the Revised Penal Code).
3. Can the crime of treason be committed only by a Filipino citizen? (2012

Bar Question)
a. Yes. The offender in the crime of treason is a Filipino citizen only
because the first element is that the offender owes allegiance to the
Government of the Philippines.
b. No. The offender in the crime of treason is either a Filipino citizen
or a foreigner married to a Filipino citizen, whether residing in the
Philippines or elsewhere, who adheres to the enemies of the
Philippines, giving them aid or comfort.
c. No. The offender in the crime of treason is either a Filipino citizen
or an alien residing in the Philippines because while permanent
allegiance is owed by the alien to his own country, he owes a
temporary allegiance to the Philippines where he resides.
d. Yes. It is not possible for an alien, whether residing in the
Philippines or elsewhere, to commit
the crime of treason because he owes allegiance to his own country.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: C.
4. Because peace negotiations on the Spratlys situation had failed, the

People’s Republic of China declared war against the Philippines. Myra, a
Filipina who lives with her Italian expatriate boyfriend, discovered e-mail
correspondence between him and a certain General Tung Kat Su of China.
On March 12, 2010, Myra discovered that on even date, her boyfriend sent an
e- mail to General Tung Kat Su, in which he agreed to provide vital
information on the military defense of the Philippines to the Chinese
government in exchange for P1 million and his safe return to Italy. Two weeks
later, Myra decided to report the matter to the proper authorities.
Did Myra commit a crime? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Myra committed the crime of Misprision of Treason because she failed to
report as soon as possible to the governor or provincial fiscal or to the mayor or
2
fiscal of the City where she resides, the conspiracy between her Italian
boyfriend and the Chinese General to commit treason against the Philippine
Government.
Under Article 116 of the Revised Penal Code, every person who, owing
allegiance to the Government, without being a foreigner, and having
knowledge of any conspiracy against it, 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, commits misprision of
treason.
5. The inter-island vessel M/V Viva Lines I, while cruising off Batanes, was
forced to seek shelter at the harbor of Kaoshiung, Taiwan because of a
strong typhoon. While anchored in said harbor, Max, Baldo and Bogart
arrived in a speedboat, fired a bazooka at the bow of the vessel, boarded it
and divested the passengers of their money and jewelry. A passenger of
M/V Viva Lines I, Dodong took advantage of the confusion to settle an old
grudge with another passenger, and killed him. After their apprehension, all
four were charged with qualified piracy before a Philippine court.
Was the charge of qualified piracy against the three persons (Max, Baldo, and
Bogart) who boarded the inter-island vessel correct? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, Max, Baldo and Bogart committed qualified piracy when, not being
members or passengers of the M/V Viva Lines I, attacked said vessel in
Philippines waters, and seized the passengers’ personal belongings. Moreover,
the crime was qualified when Max, Baldo and Bogart boarded the vessel and
fired upon the ship, and divested the passengers of their money and jewelry
(Art. 122, 123 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by R.A. 7659 and P.D.
532). The crime was further qualified when they fired upon the vessel and
boarded it.
B. Crimes against the Fundamental Law of the State

6. In his homily, Fr. Chris loudly denounced the many extrajudicial killings
committed by the men in uniform. Policeman Stone, then attending the
mass, was peeved by the denunciations of Fr. Chris. He immediately
approached the priest during the homily, openly displayed his firearm
tucked in his waist, and menacingly uttered at the priest: Father, may
kalalagyan kayo kung hindi kayo tumigil. His brazenness terrified the
priest, who cut short his homily then and there. The celebration of the mass
was disrupted, and the congregation left the church in disgust over the
actuations of Policeman Stone, a co-parishioner.
Policeman Stone was subsequently charged.
The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor is now about to resolve the case, and is
mulling on what to charge Policeman Stone with.
May Policeman Stone be properly charged with either or both of the following
crimes, or, if not, with what proper crime? (2017 Bar Question)
a. Interruption of religious worship as defined and punished under Art.

132 of the Revised Penal Code; and/or
3
b. Offending the religious feelings as defined and punished under Art.
133 of the Revised Penal Code.
Explain fully your answers.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Policeman Stone may be charged with Interruption of religious

worship because he is a public officer who disrupted the mass and caused
the congregation to leave.
Under the Revised Penal Code, a public officer or employee who shall
prevent or disturb the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion shall be
liable for interruption of religious worship.
In this case, Policeman Stone, a public officer, disrupted the mass and
caused the congregation to leave when he approached and threatened the
priest during his homily.
B) Policeman Stone may not be charged with the crime of offending

religious feelings because his act of threatening the priest was not for the
purpose of mocking or ridiculing the mass.
Jurisprudence provides that to be liable for offending religious feelings, the

acts must be directed against religious practice or dogma or ritual to
ridicule, mock or scoff at or attempt to damage an object of religious
veneration [People v. Baes, (G.R. No. 46000 (1939)].
In this case, however, Policeman Stone threatened the priest because of the
priest’s statements during his homily, and not to mock or ridicule the
ceremony. Hence, he is not guilty of offending religious feelings.
7. What is the criminal liability, if any, of a mayor who, without being

authorized by law, compels prostitutes residing in his city to go to, and live
in, another place against their will? (2012 Bar Question)
a. The mayor is criminally liable for violation of domicile.
b. The mayor is criminally liable for expulsion.
c. The mayor is criminally liable for grave coercion.
d. The mayor incurs no criminal liability because he merely wants to
protect the youth against the indecency of the prostitutes.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: B.
8. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE if the

statement is false.
Explain your answer in not more than two (2) sentences.
a. policeman who, without a judicial order, enters a private house over

the owner’s opposition is guilty of trespass to dwelling. (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
False, the policeman committed Violation of Domicile under Article 128 of the
Revised Penal Code because it is committed by public officer who enters a
4
dwelling against the will of the owner thereof without authority from a judicial
order.
9. After due hearing on a petition for a writ of amparo founded on the acts of
enforced disappearance and extralegal killing of the son of the complainant
allegedly done by the respondent military officers, the court granted the
petition. May the military officers be criminally charged in court with
enforced disappearance and extralegal killing? Explain fully. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes, the respondent military officers may be criminally charged in court

since “enforced disappearance” may constitute Arbitrary Detention under
Article 124 of the Revised Penal Code. On the other hand, extralegal killing
may either be considered as Murder under Article 248 or Homicide under
Article 249 of the same Code.
C. Crimes against Public Order
10. Bernardo was enraged by his conviction for robbery by Judge Samsonite
despite insufficient evidence. Pending his appeal, Bernardo escaped in
order to get even with Judge Samsonite. Bernardo learned that the Judge
regularly slept in his mistress’ house every weekend. Thus, he waited for
the Judge to arrive on Saturday evening at the house of his mistress. It was
about 8:00 p.m. when Bernardo entered the house of the mistress. He
found the Judge and his mistress having coffee in the kitchen and engaging
in small talk. Without warning, Bernardo stabbed the judge at least 10
times. The judge instantly died.
Prosecuted and tried, Bernardo was convicted of direct assault with murder.
Rule with reasons whether or not the conviction for direct assault with murder
was justified, and whether or not the trial court should appreciate the following
aggravating circumstances against Bernardo, to wit: (1) disregard of rank and
age of the victim, who was 68 years old; (2) dwelling; (3) nighttime; (4)
cruelty; and (5) quasi-recidivism. (10%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Bernardo was correctly convicted of direct assault with murder. Attacking

Judge Samsonite by reason of past performance of duty of convicting Bernardo
based on his assessment of the evidence constitutes qualified direct assault. He
likewise committed the crime of murder when he committed the direct assault
with the circumstance of treachery. In a single act of attacking Judge
Samsonite, he committed two crimes, direct assault and murder. The two
crimes may be complexed under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code.
a. The circumstance of disregard of rank shall be absorbed because it

is inherent element of the crime of direct assault.
b. The circumstance of disregard of age is not present in this case
because Bernardo’s attack was not for the purpose of offending or
insulting Judge Samsonite’s age. (People v. Onabia, G.R. No.
128288, Apr. 20, 1999).
5
c. The circumstance of dwelling maybe appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance because Judge Samsonite was attacked in the house of
his mistress, where he regularly slept. In the aggravating
circumstance of dwelling, the victim need not be the owner of the
dwelling place, but as the owner’s invited guest, he, the stranger, is
sheltered by the same roof and protected by the same intimacy it
affords. He is entitled to respect even for that short moment.
(People v. Balansi, G.R. No. 77284, 19 July 1990).
d. The circumstance nighttime shall not be appreciated because the

presence of treachery in the instant case absorbs this aggravating
circumstance (People v. Pagador, G.R. No. 140006-10, April 20,
2001).
e. The circumstance of cruelty may not also be appreciated because

the infliction of several stab wounds by the perpetrator was not
shown to be for the purpose of exacerbating the pain and suffering
of the victim. The number of wounds inflicted on the victim is not
proof of cruelty (Simangan v. People, G.R. No. 157984, July 8,
2004).
f. Bernardo is also not a quasi-recidivist because he committed the

crime while the judgement of conviction is on appeal. A quasi-
recidivist is someone who shall commit a felony after having been
convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such
sentence, or while serving the same (Article 160 of the Revised
Penal Code).
11. Dancio, a member of a drug syndicate, was a detention prisoner in the

provincial jail of X Province. Brusco, another member of the syndicate,
regularly visited Dancio. Edri, the guard in charge who had been receiving
gifts from Brusco everytime he visited Dancio, became friendly with him
and became relaxed in the inspection of his belongings during his jail visits.
In one of Brusco's visits, he was able to smuggle in a pistol which Dancio
used to disarm the guards and destroy the padlock of the main gate of the
jail, enabling Dancio to escape. What crime(s) did Dancio, Brusco and Edri
commit? Explain. (2015 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Dancio committed the crime of direct assault under Article 148 of the Revised
Penal Code for disarming the guards with the use of pistol while they are
engaged in the performance of their duties.
Edri committed infidelity in the custody of prisoner or evasion through

negligence under Article 224 of the RPC. As the guard in charge, Edri was
negligent in relaxing the inspection of the Brusco’s belongings during jail visits
allowing him to smuggle a pistol to Dencio, which he subsequently used to
escape. Edri also committed indirect bribery under Article 211 of the Revised
Penal Code by accepting gifts from Brusco, who was part of the syndicate to
which Dancio belonged.
Brusco committed delivery of prisoner from jail under Article 156 of the
Revised Penal Code, as well as bribery under Article 210 of the same Code.
Helping a person confined in jail to escape constitutes this crime, and by
providing Dencio with a pistol, he helped him escape.
6
12. Miss Reyes, a lady professor, caught Mariano, one of her students,
cheating during an examination. Aside from calling Mariano's attention,
she confiscated his examination booklet and sent him out of the room,
causing Mariano extreme embarrassment.
In class the following day, Mariano approached Miss Reyes and without any
warning, slapped her on the face. Mariano would have inflicted grave
injuries on Miss Reyes had not Dencio, another student, intervened. Mariano
then turned his ire on Dencio and punched him repeatedly, causing him
injuries.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Mariano commit? (2013 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mariano is liable for two counts of direct assault for slapping Miss Reyes and
repeatedly punching
Dencio. Miss Reyes is a person in authority expressly mentioned in Article
152 of the Revised Penal Code, who was in the performance of her duties on
the day of the commission of the assault. On the other hand, Dencio, became
an agent of a person in authority when he came to the aid of a person in
authority, Miss Reyes.
13. Amelia, a famous actress, bought the penthouse unit of a posh

condominium building in Taguig City. Every night, Amelia would swim
naked in the private, but open air, pool of her penthouse unit. It must have
been obvious to Amelia that she could be seen from nearby buildings. In
fact, some residents occupying the higher floors of the nearby residential
buildings did indeed entertain themselves and their friends by watching her
swim in the nude from their windows.
What crime did Amelia commit? (2013 Bar Question)

a. Alarms and scandals because her act of swimming naked disturbs
the public tranquility.
b. Grave scandal because she committed highly scandalous acts that
are offensive to decency or good customs.
c. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions, and
indecent shows under Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code,
because her act of swimming naked is akin to an indecent live show.
d. Amelia did not commit any crime because the swimming pool is
located in her private home.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: D.
14. During a military uprising aimed at ousting the duly constituted authorities
and taking over the government, General Tejero and his men forcibly took
over the entire Rich Hotel which they used as their base. They used the
rooms and other facilities of the hotel, ate all the available food they found,
and detained some hotel guests.
What crime did General Tejero and his men commit? (2013
Bar Question) A) Rebellion complexed with serious illegal
detention and estafa.
B) Rebellion.
C) Coup d'etat.
7
D) Terrorism.
E) None of the above.
15. A, B, and C organized a meeting in which the audience was incited to the
commission of the crime of sedition. Some of the persons present at the
meeting were carrying unlicensed firearms. What crime, if any, was
committed by A, 8 and C, as well as those who were carrying unlicensed
firearms and those who were merely present at the meeting? (2012 Bar
Question)
a. Inciting to sedition for A, B and C and illegal possession of firearms

for those carrying unlicensed firearms.
b. Inciting to sedition for A, B and C and those carrying unlicensed
firearms.
c. Illegal assembly for A, B, C and all those present at the meeting.
d. Conspiracy to commit sedition for A, B, C and those present at the
meeting.
16. B was convicted by final judgment of theft. While serving sentence for
such offense, B was found in possession of an unlicensed firearm. Is B a
quasi-recidivist? (2012 Bar Question)
a. B is a quasi-recidivist because he was serving sentence when found

in possession of an unlicensed firearm.
b. B is not a quasi-recidivist because the offense for which he was
serving sentence is different from the second offense.
c. B is not a quasi-recidivist because the second offense is not a
felony.
d. B is not a quasi-recidivist because the second offense was
committed while still serving for the first offense.
17. The guard was entrusted with the conveyance or custody of a detention
prisoner who escaped through his negligence. What is the criminal liability
of the escaping prisoner? (2012 Bar Question)
a. The escaping prisoner does not incur criminal liability.
b. The escaping prisoner is liable for evasion through negligence.
c. The escaping prisoner is liable for conniving with or consenting to,
evasion.
d. The escaping prisoner is liable for evasion of service of sentence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Evasion through negligence (Article 224 of the Revised Penal Code) and
conniving with or consenting to evasion (Article 223) are crimes committed by
public officer in charged with the conveyance or custody of the prisoner; either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment; hence, letters “b” and “c” are
not the answer. Evasion of service of sentence (Article 157) can only be
committed by a prisoner by final judgment, and not by mere detention prisoner
8
(Curiano vs. CFI, G.R. No. L- 8104, April 15, 1955). Hence, “A” is the answer.
The escapee does not incur criminal liability.
18. How is the crime of coup d'etat committed? (2012 Bar Question)
a. By rising publicly and taking arms against the Government for the
purpose of depriving the Chief Executive of any of his powers or
prerogatives.
b. When a person holding public employment undertakes a swift
attack, accompanied by strategy or stealth, directed against public
utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power for the purpose of diminishing state power.
c. When persons rise publicly and tumultuously in order to prevent by
force the National Government from freely exercising its function.
d. When persons circulate scurrilous libels against the Government
which tend to instigate others to meet together or to stir up the
people against the lawful authorities.
19. What is the proper charge against public officers or employees who, being
in conspiracy with the rebels, failed to resist a rebellion by all means in
their power, or shall continue to discharge the duties of their offices under
the control of the rebels, or shall accept appointment to office under them?
(2012 Bar Question)
a. disloyalty of public officers or employees;
b. rebellion;
c. conspiracy to commit rebellion;
d. dereliction of duty.
20. What is the proper charge against a person who, without taking arms or
being in open hostility against the Government, shall incite others to
deprive Congress of its legislative powers, by means of speeches or
writings? (2012 Bar Question)
a. inciting to sedition;
b. inciting to rebellion or insurrection;
c. crime against legislative body;
d. unlawful use of means of publication or unlawful utterances.
21. What is the crime committed when a group of persons entered the
municipal building rising publicly and taking up arms in pursuance of the
movement to prevent exercise of governmental authority with respect to the
residents of the municipality concerned for the purpose of effecting
changes in the manner of governance and removing such locality under
their control from allegiance to the laws of the Government? (2012 Bar
Question)
a. sedition;
b. coup d'etat;
c. insurrection; D) public disorder.
9
22. When is a disturbance of public order deemed to be tumultuous? (2012 Bar

Question)
a. The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous if caused by more than
three (3) persons who are armed or provided with means of
violence.
b. The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous when a person causes
a serious disturbance in a public place or disturbs public
performance, function or gathering.
c. The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous when more than three
(3) persons make any outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition
or shout subversive or provocative words to obtain any of the
objectives of rebellion or sedition.
d. The disturbance shall be deemed tumultuous when at least four (4)
persons participate in a free- for-all-fight assaulting each other in a
confused and tumultuous manner.
SUGGESTED ANSWER: A.
23. What is the criminal liability, if any, of a police officer who, while
Congress was in session, arrested a member thereof for committing a crime
punishable by a penalty higher than prision mayor? (2012 Bar Question)
a. The police officer is criminally liable for violation of parliamentary
immunity because a member of Congress is privileged from arrest
while Congress is in session.
b. The police officer is criminally liable for disturbance of proceedings
because the arrest was made while Congress was in session.
c. The police officer incurs no criminal liability because the member
of Congress has committed a crime punishable by a penalty higher
than prision mayor.
d. The police officer is criminally liable for violation of parliamentary
immunity because parliamentary immunity guarantees a member of
Congress complete freedom of expression without fear of being
arrested while in regular or special session.
24. What is the proper charge against a group of four persons who, without
public. uprising, employ force to prevent the holding of any popular
election? (2012 Bar Question)
a. sedition;
b. disturbance of public order; C) grave coercion;
D) direct assault.
25. Which of the following circumstances may be appreciated as aggravating in

the crime of treason?
(2012 Bar Question)
a. cruelty and ignominy;
b. evident premeditation; C) superior strength;
D) treachery.
10
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Cruelty may be appreciated in treason by deliberately augmenting the wrong

by being unnecessarily cruel. However, treachery, abuse of superior strength
and evident premeditation are by their nature, inherent in the offense of treason
and may not be taken to aggravate the penalty.
26. What is the criminal liability, if any, of AAA who substitutes for a prisoner
serving sentence for homicide by taking his place in jail or penal
establishment? (2012 Bar Question)
a. AAA is criminally liable for delivering prisoner from jail and for
using fictitious name.
b. AAA is criminally liable as an accessory of the crime of homicide
by assisting in the escape or concealment of the principal of the
crime.
c. AAA is criminally liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoners.
d. AAA is criminally liable for misrepresentation or concealing his
true name.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. A person, who shall help the escape of person confined in jail or penal
establishment by means of violence, intimidation, or bribery or other means, is
liable for delivering prisoner from jail (Article 156 of the Revised Penal
Code). A person who shall publicly use a fictitious name for the purpose of
concealing a crime commits using fictitious name (Article 178 of the Revised
Penal Code).
27. AAA was convicted of theft by a Manila Court and sentenced to a straight
penalty of one (1) year of prision correccional. After serving two (2)
months of the sentence, he was granted conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive. One of the conditions of the pardon was for him not to be found
guilty of any crime punishable by the laws of the country. He subsequently
committed robbery in Pasay City. Can the Manila Court require AAA to
serve the unexpired portion of the original sentence? (2012 Bar Question)
a. Yes. The Manila Court has the authority to recommit AAA to serve
the unexpired portion of the original sentence in addition to the
penalty for violation of conditional pardon. B) No. The penalty
remitted by the conditional pardon is less than six (6) years.
C) Yes. The penalty for violation of conditional pardon is the
unexpired portion of the punishment in the original sentence.
D) No. AAA must first be found guilty of the subsequent offense
before he can be prosecuted for violation of conditional pardon.
28. Which of the following statements constitute Inciting to Sedition? (2011

Bar Question) A) Utterance of statements irritating or obnoxious to the ears
of the police officers.
B) Speeches extolling communism and urging the people to hold a
national strike and paralyze commerce and trade.
C) Leaders of jeepney and bus associations shouting "Bukas tuloy ang
welga hanggang sa magkagulo na!"
D) Speeches calling for resignation of high government officials
11
29. To secure the release of his brother Willy, a detention prisoner, and his
cousin Vincent, who is serving sentence for homicide, Chito asked the RTC
Branch Clerk of Court to issue an Order which would allow the two
prisoners to be brought out of jail. At first, the Clerk refused, but when
Chito gave her P50,000.00, she consented.
She then prepared an Order requiring the appearance in court of Willy and
Vincent, ostensibly as witnesses in a pending case. She forged the judge’s
signature, and delivered the Order to the jail warden who, in turn, allowed
Willy and Vincent to go out of jail in the company of an armed escort, Edwin.
Chito also gave Edwin P50,000.00 to leave the two inmates unguarded for
three minutes and provide them with an opportunity to escape. Thus, Willy and
Vincent were able to escape.
What crime or crimes, if any, had been committed by Chito, Willy, Vincent,
the Branch Clerk of Court, Edwin, and the jail warden? Explain your answer.
(2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crimes committed by Chito, Willy, Vincent, the Branch Clerk of Court,
Edwin, and the jail warden are as follows:
a. Chito committed the crimes of (a) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail

(Art. 156, RPC) for working out the escape of prisoners Willy and
Vincent; (b) two counts of Corruption of Public Officials when he gave
Php50,000.00 each to the Branch Clerk of Court and Edward; Art. 212,
RPC); and (c) Falsification of Public Documents, as a principal by
inducement (Art. 172[1], RPC, when he caused the falsification of the
court’s Order by the Branch Clerk of Court.
b. Willy committed the crime of Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art.

156, RPC) as a principal by indispensable participation if he was aware
of the criminal plan of Chito to have them escape from prison and he did
escape pursuant to such criminal plan; otherwise he would not be liable
for said crime if he escaped pursuant to human instinct only.
c. Vincent, being a prisoner serving sentence by final judgment,

committed the crime of Evasion of Service of Sentence (Art. 157, RPC)
for escaping during the term of his imprisonment.
d. The Branch Clerk of Court committed the crimes of –

1. Direct Bribery (Art. 210, RPC) for accepting the
P50,000.00, in consideration of the Order she issued to enable the
prisoners to get out of jail;
2. Falsification of Public Document for forgoing the judge’s
signature on said Order (Art. 171, RPC);
3. Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art. 156, RPC), as a co-
principal of Chito by indispensable cooperation for making the
false Order and forgoing the judge’s signature thereon, to enable
the prisoners to get out of jail;
12
4. Evasion of Service of Sentence (Art. 157, RPC) as a co-
principal of Vincent by indispensable cooperation for making the
false Order that enable Vincent to evade service of his sentence;
e. Edwin, the jail guard who escorted the prisoner in getting out of jail,
committed the crimes of –
1. Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, especially conniving
with or consenting to Evasion for leaving unguarded the prisoners
escorted by him and provide them an opportunity to escape (Art.
223, RPC);
2. Direct Bribery for receiving the P50,000.00 as consideration
for leaving the prisoners unguarded and allowing them the
opportunity to escape (Art. 210, RPC).
The jail warden did not commit nor incur a crime there being no showing
that he was aware of what his subordinates had done nor of any negligence
on his part that would amount to infidelity in the custody of prisoners.
30. Rigoberto gate-crashed the 71st birthday party of Judge Lorenzo.

Armed with a piece of wood commonly known as dos por dos, Rigoberto
hit Judge Lorenzo on the back, causing the latter’s hospitalization for 30
days. Upon investigation, it appeared that Rigoberto had a grudge against
Judge Lorenzo who, two years earlier, had cited Rigoberto in contempt
and ordered his imprisonment for three (3) days.
a. Is Rigoberto guilty of Direct Assault? Why or why not? (2009 Bar

Question)
b. Would your answer be the same if the reason for the attack was
that when Judge Lorenzo was still a practicing lawyer ten years
ago, he prosecuted Rigoberto and succeeded in sending him to jail
for one year? Explain your answer. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) No, Rigoberto is not guilty of Direct Assault because Judge

Lorenzo has ceased to be a judge when he was attacked. He has retired (71
years old) from his position as a person in authority when he was attacked.
Hence, the attack on him cannot be regarded as against a person in
authority anymore.
B) Yes, Rigorberto would still not be guilty of Direct Assault because a

lawyer, who is deemed a person in authority, must have been assaulted
when engaged in actual performance of his professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance. In this case, however, Judge Lorenzo, who
was still a lawyer then, was celebrating his birthday at the time when
Rigoberto assaulted him. He was neither in the performance of his duties
nor attacked on occasion thereof.
31. What are the different acts of inciting to sedition? (2007 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The different acts which constitute the crime of inciting to sedition are:
13
1. Inciting others through speeches, writings, banners and other
media of representation to commit acts which constitutes sedition;
2. Uttering seditious words, speeches or circulating scurrilous libels
against the Government of the Philippines or any of its duly constituted
authorities, which tend to disturb or obstruct the performance of official
functions, or which tend to incite others to cabal and meet for unlawful
purposes;
3. Inciting through the same media of representation rebellious
conspiracies or riots;
4. Stirring people to go against lawful authorities, or disturb the
peace and public order of the community or of the Government; or 5.
Knowingly concealing any of the aforestated evil practices (Art. 142,
Revised Penal Code).
D. Crimes against Public Interest
32. Erwin and Bea approached Mayor Abral and requested him to solemnize
their marriage. Mayor Abral agreed. Erwin and Bea went to Mayor Abral's
office on the day of the ceremony, but Mayor Abral was not there. When
Erwin and Bea inquired where Mayor Abral was, his chief of staff Donato
informed them that the Mayor was campaigning for the coming elections.
Donato told them that the Mayor authorized him to solemnize the marriage
and that Mayor Abral would just sign the documents when he arrived.
Donato thereafter solemnized the marriage and later turned over the
documents to Mayor Abral for his signature. In the marriage contract, it
was stated that the marriage was solemnized by Mayor Abral. What
crime(s) did Mayor Abral and Donato commit? Explain. (2015 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Donato committed Usurpation of Official Functions under Article 177 of the

Revised Penal Code because he performed the act of solemnizing a marriage
which pertained to the mayor, without being lawfully entitled to do so.
Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of public document by a public officer

under Article 171. Making an untruthful statement by stating in a marriage
contract, a public document, that the marriage was solemnized him, is an act of
falsification.
33. What is the criminal liability, if any, of a physician who issues a false
medical certificate in connection with the practice of his profession? (2012
Bar Question)
a. The physician is criminally liable for falsification of medical
certificate.
b. The physician is criminally liable if the false medical certificate is
used in court.
c. The physician incurs no criminal liability if the false medical
certificate is not submitted to the court.
d. The physician incurs no criminal liability if the false medical
certificate does not cause prejudice or damage.
14
34. The baptism of A was solemnized by B, an ecclesiastical minister, in the
absence of C, one of the godparents. Upon request of the mother of A, B
caused the inclusion of the name of C in the baptismal certificate of A as
one of the godparents and allowed a proxy for C during the baptismal
ceremony. What is the criminal liability, if any, of the ecclesiastical
minister? (2012 Bar Question)
a. The ecclesiastical minister is criminally liable for falsification of
baptismal certificate by causing it to appear that C participated in
the baptismal ceremony when he did not in fact so participate.
b. The ecclesiastical minister is not criminally liable because the
insertion of the name of C in the baptismal certificate will not affect
the civil status of A.
c. The ecclesiastical minister is not criminally liable because he is not
a public officer, employee or notary.
d. The ecclesiastical minister is not criminally liable because he did
not take advantage of his official position nor cause damage to a
third party.
E. Crimes against Public Morals
F. Crimes committed by Public Officers
35. To aid in the rebuilding and revival of Tacloban City and the surrounding
areas that had been devastated by the strongest typhoon to hit the country in
decades, the Government and other sectors , including NGOs, banded
together in the effort. Among the NGOs was Bangon Waray, Inc. (BaWI),
headed by Mr. Jose Ma. Gulang, its President and CEO. BaWI operated
mainly as a social amelioration and charitable institution. For its activities
in the typhoon-stricken parts of Leyte Province, BaWI received funds from
all sources, local and foreign, including substantial amounts from
legislators, local government officials and the EU. After several months,
complaints were heard about the very slow distribution of relief goods and
needed social services by BaWI.
The COA reported the results of its audit to the effect that at least P10 Million
worth of funds coming from public sources channeled to BaWI were not yet
properly accounted for. The COA demanded reimbursement but BaWI did not
respond.
Hence, Mr. Gulang was criminally charged in the Office of the Ombudsman
with malversation of public funds as respectively defined and punished by Art.
217 and Art.218 of the Revised Penal Code. He was also charged with
violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019 for causing undue injury to the
Government.
In his defense, Mr. Gulang mainly contended that he could not be held liable
under the various charges because he was not a public officer. (2017 Bar
Question)
a. Who is a public officer?

b. Discuss whether the crimes charged against Mr. Gulang are proper.
Explain your answer.
15
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) A public officer is any person who, by direct provision of the law,

popular election or appointment by competent authority, shall take part in
the performance of public functions in the Government of the Philippine
Islands, or shall perform in said Government or in any of its branches
public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or
class.
B) Mr. Gulang, although a private person, may be charged with

malversation and failure of accountable officer to render accounts because
he was in made in charge of public funds. Malversation and failure to
render accounts shall also apply to private individuals who, in any capacity
whatever, have charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds,
revenues or property.
Mr. Gulang may not be held liable for RA No. 3019 because it was not
shown that he conspired with a public officer in committing the crime. As a
general rule, a private individual can be held liable for violation of if he
conspired with a public officer in committing this crime.
36. A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of the inhabitants of X

Municipality. Thereafter, X Municipality operated a shelter assistance
program whereby construction materials were provided to the calamity
victims, and the beneficiaries provided the labor. The construction was
partially done when the beneficiaries stopped helping with the construction
for the reason that they needed to earn income to provide food for their
families. When informed of the situation, Mayor Maawain approved the
withdrawal of ten boxes of food from X Municipality's feeding program,
which were given to the families of the beneficiaries of the shelter
assistance program. The appropriations for the funds pertaining to the
shelter assistance program and those for the feeding program were separate
items on X Municipality's annual budget. (2015 Bar Question)
a. What crime did Mayor Maawain commit? Explain.
b. May Mayor Maawain invoke the defense of good faith and that he
had no evil intent when he approved the transfer of the boxes of
food from the feeding program to the shelter assistance program?
Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Mayor Maawain committed the crime of Illegal use of public funds

or property or Technical Malversation under Art. 220 of the RPC, because
as an accountable public officer, he applied public funds and property under
his administration, which were supposedly for the feeding program, to
some other public use, i.e., the beneficiaries of the shelter assistance
program.
B) No. Since the offense of Technical Malversation is mala prohibita,

good faith is not a defense. The law punishes the mere act of diverting
public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular purpose to
another public purpose.
16
37. Filthy, a very rich businessman, convinced Loko, a clerk of court, to issue
an order of release for Takas, Filthy’s cousin, who was in jail for a drug
charge. After receiving P500,000.00, Loko forged the signature of the
judge on the order of release and accompanied Filthy to the detention
center.
At the jail, Loko gave the guard P10,000.00 to open the gate and let Takas out.
What crime or crimes did Filthy, Loko, and the guard commit? (2014 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Filthy committed the following crimes:

(a) Delivery of prisoners from Jail, Article 156, RPC, because he
assisted in the removal of Takas, a detention prisoner, from jail.
(b) Corruption of Public Officials, Article 212, RPC, because he gave
P500,000.00 to the clerk of court, under circumstances in which said
public officer would be liable of direct bribery.
(c) Falsification of Public Document, Article 172(1), RPC, as a
principal by inducement because he gave the clerk of court P500,000.00
to induce him to forge the signature of the judge in the order of release.
Loko committed the following crimes:

(a) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC, because he accepted P500,000.00
in consideration of the execution of an act which constitutes a crime,
i.e., forging the signature of the judge in the order of release that would
enable Takas to get out of jail, in connection with the performance of
his duty as a clerk of court.
(b) Falsification of Public Document, Article 171, RPC, because he
took advantage of his position as a clerk of court in forging the
signature of the judge in the order of release.
(c) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail, Article 156, RPC, because he
assisted in the removal of Takas from jail by forging the signature of
the judge in the in the falsified order of release.
The guard committed the following crimes:

(a) Direct Bribery, Article 210, RPC, because in consideration of
P10,000.00, he agreed to open the gate and let Takas out.
(b) Infidelity in the Custody of Prisoners, Article 223, RPC, because as
the custodian of Takas, connived or consented to his escape by opening
the gate.
38. Frank borrowed P1,000,000 from his brother Eric. To pay the loan, Frank
issued a post-dated check to be presented for payment a month after the
transaction. Two days before maturity, Frank called Eric telling him he had
insufficient funds and requested that the deposit of the check be deferred.
Nevertheless, Eric deposited the check and it was dishonored. When Frank
failed to pay despite demand, Eric filed a complaint against him for
violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (The Bouncing Checks Law).
Was the charge brought against Frank correct? (2013 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
17
Yes, the charge of Violation of BP 22 is correct. Being malum prohibitum, it is
committed by mere issuance of a worthless check, and the conditions relating
to the issuance are irrelevant to the prosecution of the offender. Frank’s request
to defer the deposit of the check as it has insufficient funds will not militate
against his prosecution for BP Blg. 22.
39. Judge Talim, upon complaint and application of the realty corporation
Batmanson, Inc., issued a writ of preliminary injunction against Darjeeling
Ventures, Inc., a competitor of Batmanson, Inc., without notice and
hearing.
If you were counsel for Darjeeling Ventures, Inc., what criminal charge should
you file against
Judge Talim? (2013 Bar Question)
a. Rendering a manifestly unjust judgment.
b. Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory order.
c. Causing undue injury through manifest partiality under R.A. No.
3019.
d. Bribery.
e. None of the above.
40. AA was appointed for a two-year term to serve the unexpired portion of a
resigned public official. Despite being disqualified after the lapse of the
two- year term, PA continued to exercise the duties and powers of the
public office to which appointed. What is the criminal liability of AA?
(2012 Bar Question)
a. AA is criminally liable for malfeasance in office.
b. AA is criminally liable for prolonging performance of duties and
powers.
c. AA is criminally liable for disobeying request for disqualification.
d. AA incurs no criminal liability because there is no indication that he
caused prejudice to anyone.
41. What crime is committed when a person assumes the performance of duties
and powers of a public office or employment without first being sworn in?
(2012 Bar Question)
a. anticipation of duties of a public office;
b. usurpation of authority; C) prohibited transaction;
D) unlawful appointment.
42. What crime is committed by a public officer who, before the acceptance of
his resignation, shall abandon his office to the detriment of the public
service in order to evade the discharge of the duties of preventing,
prosecuting or punishing the crime of treason? (2012 Bar Question) A)
abandonment of office or position;
B) qualified abandonment of office;
C) misprision of treason;
18
D) negligence in the prosecution of offense.
43. A jailer inflicted injury on the prisoner because of his personal grudge
against the latter. The injury caused illness of the prisoner for more than
thirty (30) days. What is the proper charge against the jailer? (2012 Bar
Question)
a. The jailer should be charged with maltreatment of prisoner and
serious physical injuries.
b. The jailer should be charged with serious physical injuries only.
c. The jailer should be charged with complex crime of maltreatment of
prisoner with serious physical injuries.
d. The jailer should be charged with maltreatment of prisoner only.
44. What is the proper charge against a lawyer who reveals the secrets of his
client learned by him in his professional capacity? (2012 Bar Question)
a. The lawyer should be charged with revelation of secrets of private
individual.
b. The lawyer should be charged with betrayal of trust.
c. The lawyer should be charged with unauthorized revelation of
classified materials.
d. The proper charge against the lawyer should be revealing secrets
with abuse of office.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
B. Betrayal of trust is committed by an attorney-at-law who, by any malicious

breach of professional duty or of inexcusable negligence, shall reveal any of
the secrets of his client learned by him in his professional capacity (Article 209
of the Revised Penal Code).
45. What crime is committed by a public officer who, having control of public
funds or property by reason of the duties of his office and for which he is
accountable, permits any other person through abandonment to take such
public funds or property? (2012 Bar Question) A) The public officer
commits malversation.
B) The public officer commits technical malversation.
C) The public officer commits the crime of failure of accountable or
responsible officer to render accounts.
D) The public officer commits the crime of failure to make delivery of
public funds or property.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
a. It is settled that a public officer is liable for malversation even if he

does not use public property or funds under his custody for his
personal benefit, if he allows another to take the funds, or through
abandonment or negligence, allow such taking.
46. In malversation of public funds, the offender’s return of the amount

malversed has the following effect: (2011 Bar Question) A) It is
exculpatory.
19
B) It is inculpatory, an admission of the commission of the crime.
C) The imposable penalty will depend on what was not returned.
D) It is mitigating.
47. A public officer who immediately returns the bribe money handed over to
him commits: (2011 Bar Question)
a. no crime.
b. attempted bribery.
c. consummated bribery.
d. frustrated bribery.
48. Direct bribery is a crime involving moral turpitude. From which of the
following elements of direct bribery can moral turpitude be inferred? (2011
Bar Question)
a. The offender receives a gift by himself or through another.

b. The offender is a public officer.
c. The offender takes a gift with a view to committing a crime in
exchange.
d. The act which the offender agrees to perform or which he executes
is connected with his official duties.
49. May a judge be charged and prosecuted for the felony of qualified bribery?
How about a public prosecutor? A police officer? Explain. (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, a judge may not be charged of this felony because his official duty as a
public officer is not law enforcement but the determination of cases already
filed in court.
a. public prosecutor may be prosecuted for qualified bribery should he

refrain from prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration of
any offer, promise, gift or present.
A police officer who refrains from arresting such offender for the same
consideration above stated, may be prosecuted for this felony since he is a
public officer entrusted with law enforcement.
50. What is the crime of qualified bribery? (2010 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Qualified robbery is a crime committed by a public officer who is entrusted

with law enforcement who, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
offer, refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed
20
a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death (Art. 211-A, Revised
Penal Code).
51. Roger and Jessie, Municipal Mayor and Treasurer, respectively, of San
Rafael, Leyte, caused the disbursement of public funds allocated for their
local development programs for 2008. Records show that the amount of P2-
million was purportedly used as financial assistance for a rice production
livelihood project. Upon investigation however, it was found that Roger
and Jessie falsified the disbursement vouchers and supporting documents in
order to make it appear that qualified recipients who, in fact, are non-
existent individuals, received the money.
Roger and Jessie are charged with malversation through falsification and
violation of Section 3 (e) of R.A. 3019 for causing undue injury to the
government. Discuss the propriety of the charges filed against Roger and
Jessie. Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The charge of complex crime of malversation through falsification is incorrect

because the act of falsification was not a necessary means to malverse the
money. The falsifications were committed to cover up or hide the malversation
and therefore, should be separately treated from malversation.
Moreover, they should be charged of violation of section 3(e) of RA 3019 for

the breach of public trust and undue injury cause to the Government.
52. Eman, a vagrant, found a bag containing identification cards and a diamond
ring along Roxas Blvd. Knowing that it was not his, he went to a nearest
police station to seek help in finding the owner of the bag. At the precinct
PO1 Melvin attended to him. In the investigation Eman proposed to PO1
Melvin, "in case you don't find the owner let's just pawn straight to the
pawnshop and pawned the ring for P50,000.00 Eman never saw PO1
Melvin again.
What is the criminal liability of PO1 Melvin, if any? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
PO1 Melvin committed the crime of theft when he took the bag of another,
evidently with intent to gain but without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things. Although he is not the one who found the
property, he is considered as finder in law since the property was surrendered
to him by the actual finder (People v. Avila, G.R. No. L-19786, 31 March
1923).
N.B.: There is no malversation of public funds property in this case because

PO1 is not an accountable officer for public funds or property whose duties
permit or require the possession or custody of government funds or property,
and who shall be accountable therefor and for the safekeeping thereof in
conformity with law (Arriola v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 165711, 30 June
2006).
53. Eliseo, the deputy sheriff, conducted the execution sale of the property of
Andres to satisfy the judgment against him in favor of ABC Corporation, a
21
government-owned or controlled corporation with an original charter.
However, the representative of the corporation failed to attend the auction
sale. Gonzalo, the winning bidder, purchased property for P100,000 which
he paid to Eliseo. Instead of remitting the amount to the Clerk of Court as
ex-officio Provincial Sheriff, Eliseo lent the amount to Myrna, his
officemate, who promised to repay the amount within two months, with
interest thereon. However, Myrna reneged on her promise. Despite
demands of ABC Corporation, Eliseo failed to remit the said amount.
a. State with reasons, the crime or crimes, if any, committed by Eliseo.

(2008 Bar Question)
b. Would your answer to the first question be the same if ABC
Corporation were a private corporation? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Eliseo committed malversation for allowing Myrna to

misappropriate the money for which he, as Sheriff, is accountable for (Art.
217, RPC). In this case, the act of Eliseo of lending the amount to his
officemate is tantamount to permitting any other person to take the public
funds, considering that the P100,000 involved is a public funds, it should
be turned-over to the Office of the Clerk of Court.
B) The answer would be the same since even if ABC is a private

corporation, Eliseo is still accountable for it, and the same should be
delivered to the Court.
54. Upon opening a letter containing 17 money orders, the mail carrier forged
the signatures of the payees on the money orders and encashed them. What
crime or crimes did the mail carrier commit? Explain briefly. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The mail carrier may be guilty of the following crimes:

(a) malversation and falsification (People. v. Villanueva);
(b) infidelity in the custody of documents (US v. Gorospe);
(c) qualified theft since the property stolen is a mail matter (Marcelo v.
Sandiganbayan);
(d) forgery under Art. 169 (2) RPC because there was a material
alteration on a genuine document (US v. Solito, 36 Phil 785); and
(e) falsification under Art. 171 (1), (2) RPC because he counterfeited
signatures to make it appear that the payees signed the money order and
received payment.
55. Manolo revealed to his friend Domeng his desire to kill Cece. He likewise
confided to Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver. Domeng lent it.
Manolo shot Cece in Manila with Domeng's revolver. As his gun was used
in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor Tan to help him escape. The mayor
gave Domeng P5,000.00 and told him to proceed to Mindanao to hide.
Domeng went to Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as an accessory
to Cece's murder.
Can he be held liable for the charge? Explain. (2007 Bar Question)
22
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the mayor may not be charged as an accessory because he merely helped
Domeng, an accomplice, to escape. Par. 3 of Art. 19, of the Revised Penal
Code speaks of harboring or assisting in the escape of a principal, not an
accomplice.
Part II
1. Sixteen year old Aliswan prodded Ametyst, his girlfriend, to remove her
clothing while they were secretly together in her bedroom late one evening.
Failing to get a positive response from her, he forcibly undressed her.
Apprehensive about rousing the attention of the household who did not
know of his presence inside her room, she resisted him with minimal
strength, but she was really sobbing in a muffled manner. He then
undressed himself while blocking the door. Yet, the image of a hapless and
sobbing Amethyst soon brought him to his senses, and impelled him to
leave her room naked. He did not notice in his hurry that Amante, the
father of Amethyst, who was then sitting alone on a sofa in the sala, saw
him leave his daughter’s room naked.
Outside the house, the now-clothed Aliswan spotted Allesso, Amethyst’s

former suitor. Knowing how Allesso had aggressively pursued Amethyst,
Aliswan fatally stabbed Allesso. Aliswan immediately went into hiding
afterwards.
Upon learning from Amethyst about what Aliswan had done to her, an
enraged Amante wanted to teach Aliswan a lesson he would never forget.
Amante set out the next day to look for Aliswan in his school. There,
Amante found a young man who looked very much like Aliswan. Amante
immediately rushed and knocked the young man unconscious on the
pavement, and then draped his body with a prepared tarpaulin reading
RAPIST AKO HUWAG TULARAN. Everyone else in the school was
shocked upon witnessing what had just transpired, unable to believe that the
timid and quiet Alisto, Aliswan’s identical twin brother, had committed
rape. (2017 Bar Question)
A) A criminal complaint for attempted rape with homicide was brought

against Aliswan in the Prosecutor’s Office. However, after preliminary
investigation, the Investigating Prosecutor recommended the filing of two
separate informations – one for attempted rape and the other for homicide.
Do you agree with the recommendation? Explain your answer.
B) Before the trial court, Aliswan moved that the cases should be dismissed
because he was entitled to the exempting circumstance of minority. Is his
motion correct? Explain your answer.
C) After receiving medical attendance for 10 days, Alisto consulted you about
filing the proper criminal complaint against Amante. What crimes, if any,
will you charge Amante with? Explain your answer.
23
D) Answering the criminal complaint filed by Alisto, Amante contended that
he had incurred no criminal liability for lack of criminal intent on his part,
his intended victim being Aliswan, not Alisto. What is this defense of
Amante, and explain if the same will prosper?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) I disagree with the charge of attempted rape, while I agree on the separate
crime of homicide.
I do not agree with the charge of attempted rape because of the failure to
show that Aliswan had done acts to have sex with Amethyst. Undressing
the victim with lewd design merely constitutes acts of lasciviousness
[People v. Sanico, (G.R. No. 208469, Aug. 13, 2014)].
I agree with the separate charge of homicide because the homicide is not
even connected with the acts of lasciviousness. Homicide was committed
motivated by a personal grudge of Aliswan against Alesso, which has no
link to the crime of acts of lasciviousness against Amethyst.
B) Since Aliswan’s age is above 15 but below 18, being the twin brother of 16
year old Aliswan, the exempting circumstance of minority shall be
appreciated in his favor unless it is shown that he acted with discernment.
C) Amante shall be charged with Less Serious Physical Injuries under Art. 265
of the Revised Penal Code because he needed medical attendance for a
period of ten (10) days only.
However, the circumstance of adding ignominy to the offense shall be

appreciated to add the penalty of a fine not exceeding Php500.00 because
the injuries were inflicted to insult or offend the offended party.
D) The defense raised by Amante is error in personae. This defense is not

proper because of Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code, which provides that
a person committing a felony is liable criminally although the wrongful act
done be different from unlawful intent. Thus, under this provision, Amante
is liable for the wrongful act done, and that is child abuse against Alisto,
although it differs from the wrongful act intended, and that is abusing
Aliswan.
2. If the slightest penetration of the female genitalia consummates Rape by

Carnal Knowledge, how does the accused commit Attempted Rape by
Carnal Knowledge? (2017 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
To be held liable for attempted rape by carnal knowledge the acts must be
committed with clear intention to have sexual intercourse, but the penis of the
accused must not touch the labia of the pudendum of the victim. Intent to have
sexual intercourse is present if is shown that the erectile penis of the accused is
in the position to penetrate or the accused actually commenced to force his
24
penis into the victim's sexual organ.
3. Why is there no crime of frustrated serious physical injuries? (2017 Bar

Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime of Serious Physical Injuries is a formal crime consummated by a

single act. Once the injuries are inflicted, the offense is consummated.
4. Jojo and Felipa are husband and wife. Believing that his work as a lawyer
is sufficient to provide for the needs of their family, Jojo convinced Felipa
to be a stay- at-home mom and care for their children. One day, Jojo
arrived home earlier than usual and caught Felipa in the act of having
sexual intercourse with their female nanny, Alma, in their matrimonial bed.
In a fit of rage, Jojo retrieved his revolver from inside the bedroom cabinet
and shot Alma, immediately killing her. (2016 Bar Question)
A) Is Art. 247 (death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances)

of the Revised Penal Code applicable in this case given that the paramour was of the
same gender as the erring spouse? B) Is Felipa liable for adultery for having sexual
relations with Alma?
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) No, Article. 247 of the Revised Penal Code is not applicable because the
offender must catch his or her spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person.
Sexual intercourse presupposes the penetration of the man’s sexual organ

into that of a woman’s. In this case, the paramour was of the same gender
as the erring spouse. As such, there is legally, no sexual intercourse to
speak of, hence, Art. 247 is not applicable.
B) No. Under Article 333 of the Revised Penal Code, adultery is committed by
any married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a “man” not
her husband. Thus, Felipa, in having homosexual intercourse with Alma, a
“woman”, is not committing adultery.
5. Lina worked as a housemaid and yaya of the one-week old son of the
spouses John and Joana. When Lina learned that her 70-year old mother
was seriously ill, she asked John for a cash advance of P20,000.00, but the
latter refused. In anger, Lina gagged the mouth of the child with stockings,
placed him in a box, sealed it with masking tape, and placed the box in the
attic. Lina then left the house and asked her friend Fely to demand a
P20,000.00 ransom for the release of the spouses' child to be paid within
twenty-four hours. The spouses did not pay the ransom. After a couple of
days, John discovered the box in the attic with his child already dead.
25
According to the autopsy report, the child died of asphyxiation barely
minutes after the box was sealed.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Lina and Fely commit? Explain. (2016 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Lina is liable for murder committed by killing the child qualified by the
circumstance of treachery. She took advantage of the child’s tender age.
Killing a child of tender age is held to be attended by treachery.
Fely is not liable for any crime. Fely did not participate in the actual killing of
the child, and it was not shown that there is conspiracy nor community of
design to commit murder since her criminal intention pertains to kidnapping
for ransom. Moreover, her participation of demanding ransom for the release
of the child is not connected to murder. Mens rea without actus reus is not a
crime.
N.B. Lina is not guilty of kidnapping with murder because the child
was not deprived of liberty. The child was essentially not deprived of
liberty. The demand for ransom did not convert the offense into
kidnapping. The demand for ransom is only a part of the diabolic
scheme of the defendant to murder the child, to conceal his body and
then demand money before the discovery of the cadaver.
6. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Tiburcio guilty of frustrated

homicide and sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of four years and
one day of prision correccional as minimum, to eight years of prision
mayor as maximum, and ordered him to pay actual damages in the amount
of P25,000.00. Tiburcio appealed to the Court of Appeals which sustained
his conviction as well as the penalty imposed by the court a quo. After
sixty days, the Court of Appeals issued an Entry of Judgment and
remanded the records of the case to the RTC. Three days thereafter,
Tiburcio died of heart attack. Atty. Abdul, Tiburcio's counsel, filed before
the RTC a Manifestation with Motion to Dismiss, informing the court that
Tiburcio died already, and claiming that his criminal liability had been
extinguished by his demise. (2015 Bar Question)
A) Should the RTC grant the Motion to Dismiss the case? Explain.
B) Assuming that Tiburcio's death occurred before the Court of Appeals

rendered its decision, will you give a different answer? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) The RTC may not grant the motion to dismiss because the Court of
Appeals already issued an Entry of Judgment and the decision has become
final and executory. However, the pecuniary penalty, such as the civil
liability arising from the crime consisting of actual damages of P25,000,
survives the death of Tiburcio.
26
B) Yes. The RTC decision must be set aside and the case against Tiburcio
must consequently be dismissed. The demise of Tiburcio which occurred
before the Court of Appeals rendered its decision causes his criminal
liability, as well as his civil liability ex delicto, to be totally extinguished
inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused, the civil
action is instituted therein for recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso
facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal case.
7. Procopio, a call center agent assigned at a graveyard shift, went home

earlier than usual. He proceeded immediately to their bedroom to change
his clothes. To his surprise, he found his wife Bionci in bed making love to
another woman Magna. Enraged, Procopio grabbed a knife nearby and
stabbed Bionci, who died. (2015 Bar Question)
A) What crime did Procopio commit, and what circumstance attended the
case? Explain.
B) Assuming that Procopio and Bionci were common-law spouses, will your
answer be the same? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Procopio commited parricide for killing his wife. This case does not fall
under death by exceptional circumstance under Article 247 of the Revised
Penal Code because Bionci was caught having homosexual intercourse,
which is not “sexual intercourse” under the law.
The crime was attended by the circumstance of passion arising from a

lawful sentiment as a result of having caught his wife in the act of
infidelity with another woman (People v. Belarmino, G.R. No. L-4429,
April 18, 1952, En Banc).
B) The crime committed is Homicide if Procopio and Bionci were common

law spouses. Parricide contemplates killing by a spouse who is legally
married to the victim.
8. After a heated argument over his philandering, Higino punched on the head
his wife Aika, who was six and a half months pregnant. Because of the
impact, Aika lost her balance, fell on the floor with her head hitting a hard
object. Aika died and the child was expelled prematurely. After thirtysix
hours, the child died. (2015 Bar Question)
A) What crime(s) did Higino commit? Explain.

B) Assuming that when the incident occurred, Aika was only six months
pregnant, and when she died, the fetus inside her womb also died, will your
answer be different? Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
27
A) Higino committed two counts of parricide for the death of his wife and his
child. Article 246 of Revised Penal Code is committed because of the
qualifying circumstance of relationship. This is a complex crime because
the single act of punching the victim constitutes two grave felonies (Article
48).
B) Yes. If the child died inside the womb of Aika, who was only six months,
the crime committed is complex crime of parricide with unintentional
abortion. Killing the unborn child as a result of the violence employed
against the mother without intent to abort is unintentional abortion.
Because the same violence that killed the mother also caused unintentional
abortion, the crime committed is a complex crime.
9. Charlie was charged for the qualified rape of AAA. The Information
alleged that AAA was 14 years old at the time the crime was committed
and that Charlie was AAA's stepfather. The presentation of AAA's birth
certificate during the trial duly established the following: ( 1) that AAA
was indeed 14 years old at the time of the rape; and (2) that AAA's mother
is BBB and her father was the late CCC. BBB and Charlie only became
live-in partners after CCC's death. The RTC found Charlie guilty of
qualified rape. On appeal, the Court of Appeals convicted Charlie of simple
rape. Charlie appealed before the Supreme Court. How will you rule and
why? (2015 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The Court of Appeals’ ruling is wrong because the crime of qualified rape was
proven. Minority and steprelationship as qualifying circumstances are alleged
in the information and proven by the evidence.
10. Macho married Ganda, a transgender. Macho was not then aware that
Ganda was a transgender. On their first night, after their marriage, Macho
discovered that Ganda was a transgender. Macho confronted Ganda and a
heated argument ensued. In the course of the heated argument, a fight took
place wherein Ganda got hold of a knife to stab Macho. Macho ran away
from the stabbing thrusts and got his gun which he pointed at Ganda just to
frighten and stop Ganda from continuing with the attack. Macho had no
intention at all to kill Ganda. Unfamiliar with guns, Macho accidentally
pulled the trigger and hit Ganda that caused the latter’s death.
What was the crime committed? (2014 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Macho did not commit any crime because he acted in self-defense [Art. 13
(1)].
11. Pretty was a campus beauty queen who, because of her looks and charms,
28
attracted many suitors. Having decided that she would become a nun,
Pretty turned down all her suitors. Guapo, one of her most persistent
suitors, could not handle rejection and one night, decided to accost Pretty
as she walked home. Together with Pogi, Guapo forced Pretty into his car
and drove her to an abandoned warehouse where he and Pogi forced Pretty
to dance for them. Later, the two took turns in raping her. After satisfying
their lusts, Guapo and Pogi dropped her off at her house. (2014 Bar
Question)
A) What crime or crimes did Guapo and Pogi commit?

B) Pretty, after the ordeal, decided to take her own life by hanging herself one
hour after the rape. Would Guapo and Pogi be liable for Pretty’s death?
Explain.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A) Guapo and Pogi committed the complex crime of Forcible Abduction with
Rape, and another count of rape. They abducted Pretty against her will with
lewd design, and thereafter raped her. Forcible abduction was a necessary
means to commit the crime of Rape. Since there is conspiracy, Guapo and
Pogi are responsible not only for the rape each personally committed but
also for the rape committed by his co- conspirator.
B) Guapo and Pogi would not be held liable for the death of Pretty. Suicide is
an efficient intervening cause that has broken the causal connection
between the rapes and the death.
12. Choose the correct circumstance when a woman may be held liable for
rape: (2013 Bar Question) A) With the use of force or intimidation.
B) When the rape is committed by two or more persons.
C) When the offender uses an instrument and inserts it in the mouth of the
victim.
D) When she befriends and puts a sleeping pill in the victim's drink to enable
her husband to have intercourse with the victim.
13. If Rod killed Irene, his illegitimate daughter, after taking her diamond
earrings and forcing her to have sex with him, what crime/s should Rod be
charged with? (2013 Bar Question)
A) Robbery and rape with parricide.

B) Robbery, rape and parricide.
C) Rape with homicide and theft.
D) Rape with homicide.
E) None of the above.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
29
D. Rod committed theft and the special complex crime of rape with homicide.
14. For treachery to qualify killing to murder, the evidence must show: (2012
Bar Question)
A) The time when the accused decided to employ treachery, the overt act
manifestly indicating that he clung to such determination, and a sufficient
lapse of time between the decision and the execution, allowing him to
reflect upon the consequence of his act.
B) Unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means to prevent or repel
the aggression, and lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the victim.
C) That the accused employed such means, methods or manner to ensure his
safety from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim, and the mode of
attack was consciously adopted.
D) Actual sudden physical assault or threat to inflict real imminent injury to an
unsuspecting victim.
15. What is the criminal liability, if any, of a pregnant woman who tried to
commit suicide by poison, but she did not die and the fetus in her womb
was expelled instead? (2012 Bar Question)
A) The woman who tried to commit suicide is not criminally liable because
the suicide intended was not consummated.
B) The woman who tried to commit suicide is criminally liable for
unintentional abortion which is punishable when caused by violence.
C) The woman who tried to commit suicide is criminally liable for abortion
that resulted due to the poison that she had taken to commit suicide.
D) The woman who tried to commit suicide occurs no criminal liability for the
result not intended.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. The pregnant woman cannot be held liable for abortion under Article 258 of
the Revised Penal Code because intent to abort, which is an essential element
of this crime, is lacking. Neither can she be held liable for unintentional
abortion under Article 257, because the element of violence is wanting.
16. Chris Brown was convicted of a complex crime of direct assault with
homicide aggravated by the commission of the crime in a place where
public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties. The penalty
for homicide is reclusion temporal. On the other hand, the penalty for
direct assault is prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
What is the correct indeterminate penalty? (2012 Bar Question)
A) Twelve (12) years of prision mayor as minimum to twenty (20) years of
reclusion temporal as maximum.
B) Ten (10) years of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and
30
four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
C) Eight (8) years of prision mayor as minimum to eighteen (18) years and
four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
D) Twelve (12) years of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years
and four (4) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. In People v. Rillorta, G.R. No. 57415, December 15, 1989, and in People v.
Recto, G.R. No. 129069, October 17, 2001, the Supreme Court En Banc found
the accused guilty of the complex crime of homicide with direct assault, and
sentenced him to suffer an indeterminate penalty ranging from twelve (12)
years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twenty (20) years of reclusion
temporal, as maximum.
17. What crime is committed by a person who kills a three-day old baby?
(2012 Bar Question)
A) infanticide;
B) homicide;
C) murder;
D) parricide.
18. What crime is committed by a person who kills his legitimate brother on
the occasion of a public calamity? (2012 Bar Question)
A) parricide;
B) homicide;
C) murder;
D) death caused in a tumultuous affray.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. Killing his legitimate brother is not parricide since he is just a collateral

relative of the accused. However, killing a person on occasion of public
calamity is qualifies the killing to murder.
19. The key element in a crime of parricide other than the fact of killing is the
relationship of the offender to the victim. Which one of the following
circumstances constitutes parricide? (2012 Bar Question)
A) Offender killing the illegitimate daughter of his legitimate son.
B) Offender killing his illegitimate grandson.
C) Offender killing his common-law wife.
D) Offender killing his illegitimate mother.
31
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is

killed by the accused; (3) the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other
descendant, or the legitimate spouse of the accused (People v. Tibon, GR
No. 188320, June 29, 2010). Killing his granddaughter, grandson or wife
shall not be considered as parricide since the relationship is not legitimate. In
parricide, the legitimacy of the relationship is an essential element thereof if
the victim is the wife or the second-degree direct relative of the offender.
Hence, “A”, “B” or “C” is not the answer. On the other hand, killing his
illegitimate mother is parricide. In parricide, the legitimacy of the
relationship is not an essential element thereof if the victim is the first-
degree direct relative of the offender.
20. What crime is committed when a mother kills the three-day old child of her
husband with their daughter? (2012 Bar Question)
A) parricide;
B) infanticide;
C) murder;
D) homicide
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. The crime committed is not infanticide since the victim killed is not less
than three days of age. As the child of her daughter, the baby is the illegitimate
grandchild of the offender. Killing her illegitimate grandchild is not parricide.
However, killing of a 3-day-old baby constitutes murder qualified by
treachery.
21. When is a crime deemed to have been committed by a band? (2012 Bar
Question)
A) When armed men, at least four (4) in number, take direct part in the
execution of the act constituting the crime.
B) When three (3) armed men act together in the commission of the crime.
C) When there are four (4) armed persons, one of whom is a principal by
inducement.
D) When there are four (4) malefactors, one of whom is armed.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. There are three elements of band under Article 14 (6) of the Revised Penal
Code, to wit: (1) there must be at least four malefactors, (2) at least four of
them are armed (People v. Solamillo, GR No. 123161, June 18, 2003, En
Banc), and (3) at least four of them take part or acted together in the
commission of crime. In People v. Lozano, September 29, 2003, GR Nos.
137370-71, the Supreme Court En Banc stated that the four armed persons
contemplated in the circumstance of band must all be principals by direct
32
participation who acted together in the execution of the acts constituting the
crime.
22. With intent to kill, GGG burned the house where F and D were staying. F
and D died as a consequence. What is the proper charge against GGG?
(2012 Bar Question) A) GGG should be charged with two (2) counts of
murder.
B) GGG should be charged with arson.
C) GGG should be charged with complex crime of arson with double murder.
D) GGG should be charged with complex crime of double murder.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
D. If the main objective of the offender is to kill a particular person who may
be in a building or edifice, when fire is resorted to as the means to accomplish
such goal the crime committed is murder only.
23. A entered the house of B. Once inside the house of B, A took and seized
personal property by compulsion from B with the use of violence and force
upon things, believing himself to be the owner of the personal property so
seized. What is the criminal liability of A? (2012 Bar Question)
A) A is criminally liable for robbery with violence because he employed
violence in the taking of the personal property from B, robbery
characterized by violence being graver than ordinary robbery committed
with force upon things.
B) A is criminally liable for robbery with force upon things in an inhabited
house because the act was committed in a house constituting the dwelling
of one or more persons.
C) A is criminally liable for grave coercion because the presumption of intent
to gain is rebutted.
D) A is criminally liable for qualified trespass to dwelling because he
employed violence.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
C. A is not criminally liable for robbery since the presumption of intent to

gain, an element of this crime, is rebutted because he took the personal
property under a bona fide belief that he owns the property. However, A is
liable for grave coercion because he used violence in seizing the property by
reason of his mistaken belief that he owned it.
24. What crime is committed when a person ill-treats another by deed without
causing any injury? (2012 Bar Question)
A) The offender commits maltreatment.

B) The offender commits slander by deed.
C) The offender commits assault.
33
D) The offender commits coercion.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
A. Maltreatment is committed by an offender, who shall ill-treat another by

deed without causing any injury (Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code).
25. Explain and illustrate the stages of execution of the crime of homicide,
taking into account the nature of the offense, the essential element of each
of the stages of execution and the manner of committing such international
felony as distinguished from felony committed through reckless
imprudence. (2012 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Elements of the crime – homicide as an intentional felony has three

stages, attempted, frustrated and consummated. In whatever stages
homicide is committed, intent to kill must be established for being an
indispensable element thereof. However, if the victim died as a
consequence of wound cause by an act committed with malice, intent to
kill in conclusively presumed and the crime committed is consummated
homicide. But if the victim did not die as a consequence of wounds
cause by an act committed with malice, intent to kill must be established
beyond reasonable doubt. If intent to kill is proven, the crime committed
is frustrated or attempted homicide. If intent to kill is not proven, the
crime committed is physical injuries. Thus, lack of intent to kill is a
defense in attempted or frustrated homicide.
Nature of the crime – if the offender with intent to kill attempted to

inflict or inflicted non-mortal wounds upon the victim, he already
directly commenced an overt act to commit homicide. Hence, the crime
committed is attempted homicide if he failed to inflict mortal wounds
upon the victim by reason of some cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance. If the offender with intent to kill inflicted mortal
wounds upon the victim, he already performed all acts of execution
which would have produced the homicide as a consequence. If death is
not produced despite the mortal character of the wounds due to causes
independent to the will of the offender, the crime committed is frustrated
homicide. If death is produced, the crime committed is consummated
homicide.
Intentional felony and culpable felony – homicide regardless of stages

must be committed with malice (general intent) and intent to kill (specific
intent). Even if there is no intent to kill and evil intent, the offender is
liable for culpable felony if the victim died or injured as a result of the
recklessness of the former. If there is no intent to kill, evil intent and
recklessness on the part of the accused, he is not liable for his intentional
act, which cause the death of or injury upon the victim because of the
exempting circumstance of accident.
26. A, B, and C agreed to rob a house of its cash. A and B entered the
34
house while C remained outside as lookout. After getting the
cash, A and B decided to set the house on fire to destroy any
evidence of their presence. What crime or crimes did C commit?
(2011 Bar Question)
A) Robbery and arson since arson took place as an incident of the

robbery.
B) Robbery and arson since C took no step to stop the arson.
C) Just for robbery since he only agreed to it and served as lookout.
D) Accomplice to robbery since his role in the crime was minimal.
27. X killed B, mistakenly believing that she was his wife, upon surprising her
having sex with another man in a motel room. What is the criminal liability
of X? (2011 Bar Question)
A) None since he killed her under exceptional circumstances.

B) None since he acted under a mistake of fact.
C) Parricide.
D) Homicide.
28. Removing, concealing or destroying documents to defraud another

constitutes the crime of estafa if committed by: (2011 Bar Question)
a. any public officer.

b. a public officer officially entrusted with the document.
c. private individuals who executed the same.
d. private individuals.
29. The accused was shocked to discover his wife and their driver sleeping in the
master’s bedroom. Outraged, the accused got his gun and killed both. Can the
accused claim that he killed the two under exceptional circumstances? (2011 Bar
Question)
a. No, since the accused had time to reflect when he got his gun.
b. No, since the accused did not catch them while having sexual intercourse.
c. Yes, since the wife and their driver desecrated the marital bed.
d. Yes, since the scene shows that they had an intimate relationship.
30. On hearing a hospital ward patient on the next bed, shrieking in pain and
35
begging to die, Mona shut off the oxygen that was sustaining the patient,
resulting in his death. What crime if any did Mona commit? (2011 Bar
Question)
a. Homicide.
b. Murder if she deliberated on her action.
c. Giving Assistance to Suicide.
d. Euthanasia.
31. A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. While eating in a seaside

restaurant, they were attacked by X, Y and Z, members of a rival fraternity.
A rumble ensued in which the abovenamed members of the two fraternities
assaulted each other in a confused and tumultuous manner resulting in the
death of A. As it cannot be ascertained who actually killed A, the members
of the two fraternities who took part in the rumble were charged for death
caused in a tumultuous affray. Will the charge prosper? Explain. (2010 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the charge of death caused in a tumultuous affray will not prosper because
the persons involved in this case composed groups organized for the common
purpose of assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally.
The killer of A, a member of SFC Fraternity could not be any other but
member of the rival fraternity. Conspiracy is therefore present among the
attackers form the rival fraternity and thus rules out the idea of an affray. The
liability of the attackers should be collective for the crime of homicide or
murder as the case may be.
32. Charlie hated his classmate, Brad, because the latter was assiduously
courting Lily, Charlie’s girlfriend. Charlie went to a veterinarian and asked
for some poison on the pretext that it would be used to kill a very sick, old
dog. Actually, Charlie intended to use the poison on Brad.
The veterinarian mistakenly gave Charlie a non-toxic powder which, when

mixed with Brad’s food, did not kill Brad.
Would your answer be the same if Brad proved to be allergic to the

powder, and after ingesting it with his food, fell ill and was hospitalized
for ten (10) days? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer would not be the same. Charlie would be criminally liable for
less serious physical injuries because his act of mixing the powder with Brad’s
food was done with felonious intent and was the proximate cause of Brad’s
36
illness for 10 days.
33. Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the same boarding house,
occupying different rooms. One late evening, when everyone in the house
was asleep, Wenceslao entered Loretta’s room with the use of a picklock.
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao ravished Loretta. After he had
satisfied his lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death and, before leaving
the room, took her jewelry.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Wenceslao commit? Explain. (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Wenceslao committed the following crimes:
(1) the special complex crime of rape with homicide because his act of having
carnal knowledge of Loretta against her will and with the use of force and
violence constituted rape, and death of Loreta was by reason or on the
occasion of the rape;
(2) theft because the taking of jewelry is a mere afterthought; and
(3) unlawful possession of picklocks and similar tools under Art. 304 of the
Revised Penal Code, because of his possession and use of the picklock
“without lawful cause.”
34. Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the same boarding house,
occupying different rooms. One late evening, when everyone in the house
was asleep, Wenceslao entered Loretta’s room with the use of a picklock.
Then, with force and violence, Wenceslao ravished Loretta. After he had
satisfied his lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death and, before leaving
the room, took her jewelry.
Would your answer to [a] [above] be the same if, despite the serious stab
wounds she sustained, Loretta survived? Explain. (2009 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the answer will be different. There will be four separate crimes of:
(1) rape;
(2) frustrated homicide or murder;
(3) theft; and
(4) unlawful possession and use of picklocks under Art. 304 of the Revised
Penal Code.
The special complex crime of rape with homicide is constituted only when
both of them are consummated.
37
35. Following his arrest after a valid buy-bust operation, Tommy was
convicted of violation of Section 5, Republic Act 9165. On appeal, Tommy
questioned the admissibility of the evidence because the police officers
who conducted the buy-bust operation failed to observe the requisite "chain
of custody" of the evidence confiscated and/or seized from him.
What is the "chain of custody" requirement in drug offenses? What is its

rationale? What is the effect of failure to observe the requirement? (2009 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
“Chain of Custody” requirement in drug offense refers to the duly recorded,

authorized movement and custody of seized dangerous drugs, controlled
chemicals, plant sources of dangerous drugs, and laboratory equipment of
dangerous drugs from the time confiscation/seizure thereof from the offender,
to its turnover and receipt in the forensic laboratory for examination to its
safekeeping and eventual presentation/offer in court as evidence of the
criminal violation, and for destruction (Dangerous Drugs Board Regulation
No. 1 Series of 2002).
Its rationale is to preserve the authenticity of the corpus delicti or body of the
crime by rendering it improbable that the original item seized/confiscated in
violation has been exchanged or substituted with another or tampered with or
contaminated. It is a method of authenticating the evidence as would support a
finding beyond reasonable doubt that the matter is what the prosecution claims
to be.
Failure to observe the “chain of custody” requirement renders the evidence

questionable, not trustworthy and insufficient to prove the corpus delicti
beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, Tommy would be acquitted on reasonable
doubt.
36. Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but their parents had objected to their
relationship because they were first cousins. They forged a pact in writing
to commit suicide. The agreement was to shoot each other in the head
which they did. Joan died. Due to medical assistance, Francis survived. Is
Francis criminally liable for the death of Joan? Explain. (2008 Bar
Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Yes. Francis is criminally liable for assisting in the suicide of Joan, as

evidenced by their written pact (Art. 253, RPC).
37. Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in Malate, Manila, demanded the
payment by Antonio, the owner of a motel in that area, of P10,000 a month
as "protection money". With the monthly payment, Roger assured, the
syndicate would provide protection to Antonio, his business, and his
38
employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger warned, the motel owner would
either be killed or his establishment destroyed. Antonio refused to pay the
protection money. Days later, at round 3:00 in the morning, Mauro, a
member of the criminal syndicate, arrived at Antonio's home and hurled a
grenade into an open window of the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and
their 3-year-old daughter were sleeping. All three of them were killed
instantly when the grenade exploded.
State, with reason, the crime or crimes that had been committed as well as the
aggravating circumstances, if any, attendant thereto. (2008 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Roger and Mauro conspired to commit the crime of murder qualified by

treachery, with the use of means involving great waste and ruin. In this case,
Mauro is liable as a principal by direct participation by using a grenade and
hurled into an open window of the victim’s bedroom. Killing the victims
while they were sleeping and in no position to defend themselves, is a
treacherous act (People v. Aguilar, 88 Phil 693, 1951).
The following are the aggravating circumstances:

(1) Treachery (Art. 14 of the Revised Penal Code)
(2) Special Aggravating Circumstances:
(a) Sec. 3, R.A. 8294 – when a person commits any of the crime under the
RPC or special laws with the use of explosive, etc. and alike incendiary
devices which resulted in the death of any person.
(b) Art. 23, R.A. 7659 – organized/syndicated crime group.
38. Eddie brought his son Randy to a local faith healer known as "Mother
Himala." He was diagnosed by the faith healer as being possessed by an
evil spirit. Eddie thereupon authorized the conduct of a "treatment"
calculated to drive the spirit from the boy’s body. Unfortunately, the
procedure conducted resulted in the boy’s death.
The faith healer and tree others who were part of the healing ritual were
charged with murder and convicted by the lower court. If you are appellate
court Justice, would you sustain the conviction upon appeal? Explain your
answer. (2007 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the conviction of murder should not be sustained because there was no
intent kill. The intent of the accused, on the contrary is to treat Randy of his
illness. However, considering that proximate cause of Randy’s death is the
ritual, accused may be held criminally liable for Reckless Imprudence
Resulting in Homicide.
39. During a concert of Gary V. and in order to prevent the crowd from
rushing to the stage, Rafael Padilla (a security guard) pointed his gun at the
39
onrush of people. When the crowd still pushed forward, Rafael fired his
gun into air to scare them off. However, the bullet hit one of the metal roof
supports, ricocheted and then hit one of the stage crew members, causing
injuries which resulted in the latter’s confinement in a hospital for twelve
days.
What crime/s did Rafael commit? Explain your answer. (2007 Bar Question)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Rafael is guilty of Simple Negligence Resulting in Less Serious Physical

Injuries because the physical injuries, which required only twelve (12) days of
medical attention resulting therefrom, shows a lack of precaution in a situation
where the danger to the discharge of the firearm is not clearly manifest.
Moreover, since the discharge of the firearm was to ward off the unruly crowd,
and not to cause alarms or was not directed to a particular person, it is neither
Alarms and Scandal under Art. 155 nor Illegal Discharge of Firearms under
Art. 254 of the Revised Penal Code.
40

Angeles University Foundation Angeles City School of Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Angeles University Foundation Angeles City School of Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Angeles University Foundation Angeles City School of Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANGELES UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION

A. Crimes against National Security and Laws of Nations

A. Espionage is committed by public officer, who is in possession, by reason

3. Can the crime of treason be committed only by a Filipino citizen? (2012

4. Because peace negotiations on the Spratlys situation had failed, the

Did Myra commit a crime? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)

B. Crimes against the Fundamental Law of the State

Policeman Stone was subsequently charged.

a. Interruption of religious worship as defined and punished under Art.

Explain fully your answers.

A) Policeman Stone may be charged with Interruption of religious

B) Policeman Stone may not be charged with the crime of offending

Jurisprudence provides that to be liable for offending religious feelings, the

7. What is the criminal liability, if any, of a mayor who, without being

8. TRUE or FALSE. Answer TRUE if the statement is true, or FALSE if the

a. policeman who, without a judicial order, enters a private house over

Yes, the respondent military officers may be criminally charged in court

C. Crimes against Public Order

Bernardo was correctly convicted of direct assault with murder. Attacking

a. The circumstance of disregard of rank shall be absorbed because it

d. The circumstance nighttime shall not be appreciated because the

e. The circumstance of cruelty may not also be appreciated because

f. Bernardo is also not a quasi-recidivist because he committed the

11. Dancio, a member of a drug syndicate, was a detention prisoner in the

Edri committed infidelity in the custody of prisoner or evasion through

13. Amelia, a famous actress, bought the penthouse unit of a posh

What crime did Amelia commit? (2013 Bar Question)

a. Inciting to sedition for A, B and C and illegal possession of firearms

a. B is a quasi-recidivist because he was serving sentence when found

22. When is a disturbance of public order deemed to be tumultuous? (2012 Bar

25. Which of the following circumstances may be appreciated as aggravating in

A. Cruelty may be appreciated in treason by deliberately augmenting the wrong

28. Which of the following statements constitute Inciting to Sedition? (2011

a. Chito committed the crimes of (a) Delivery of Prisoners from Jail

b. Willy committed the crime of Delivery of Prisoners from Jail (Art.

c. Vincent, being a prisoner serving sentence by final judgment,

d. The Branch Clerk of Court committed the crimes of –

30. Rigoberto gate-crashed the 71st birthday party of Judge Lorenzo.

a. Is Rigoberto guilty of Direct Assault? Why or why not? (2009 Bar

A) No, Rigoberto is not guilty of Direct Assault because Judge

B) Yes, Rigorberto would still not be guilty of Direct Assault because a

D. Crimes against Public Interest

Donato committed Usurpation of Official Functions under Article 177 of the

Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of public document by a public officer

E. Crimes against Public Morals

F. Crimes committed by Public Officers

a. Who is a public officer?

A) A public officer is any person who, by direct provision of the law,

B) Mr. Gulang, although a private person, may be charged with

36. A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of the inhabitants of X

a. What crime did Mayor Maawain commit? Explain.

A) Mayor Maawain committed the crime of Illegal use of public funds

B) No. Since the offense of Technical Malversation is mala prohibita,

Filthy committed the following crimes:

Loko committed the following crimes:

The guard committed the following crimes:

B. Betrayal of trust is committed by an attorney-at-law who, by any malicious

a. It is settled that a public officer is liable for malversation even if he

46. In malversation of public funds, the offender’s return of the amount