ELVIRA YU OH versus COURT OF APPEALS AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
IMPORTANT CRIMINAL LAW RULING
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Two. B.P. Blg. twenty-two - Criminal Liability
Three. Presumption of Innocence / Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt
Four. Prospective vs. Retroactive Application
Theories in Criminal Law One. CLASSICAL THEORY
Three. ECLECTIC OR MIXED THEORY
❖ Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
One. POTENCIANA EVANGELISTA v. PEOPLE
Whether Evangelista may be held criminally liable for an act that was not clearly defined and penalized by law.
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Two. PEÑALOSA v. OCAMPO, JR.
Characteristics of Criminal Law: Generality, Territoriality, and Prospectivity
EXCEPTIONS TO THE GENERAL APPLICATION OF CRIMINAL LAW
AN EXAMPLE OF TREATY STIPULATION:
EXAMPLE OF PREFERENTIAL APPLICATION
PERSONS EXEMPT FROM THE OPERATION OF OUR CRIMINAL LAWS BY VIRTUE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
Two. TERRITORIAL - to punish crimes committed within the Philippine territory.
EXTENT OF THE PHILIPPINE TERRITORY FOR PURPOSES OF CRIMINAL LAW.
Three. PROSPECTIVE - penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when committed.
EXCEPTION TO THE PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF CRIMINAL LAWS
Construction and interpretation
Strict Construction of Penal Laws / Harmonization of Statutes
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Two. Abarquez versus People
In Dubio Pro Reo / Equipoise Rule / Presumption of Innocence
CONNECTION TO CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION
Topic: Strict Construction of Penal Laws / Rule of Lenity
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Four. G O versus Dimagiba
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Five. PEOPLE versus GONZALES
Pro Reo Doctrine / Interpretation of Penalties / Indeterminate Sentence Law
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
Six. BONGALON versus PEOPLE
Strict Construction of Special Penal Laws / Pro Reo / Specific Intent
CONNECTION TO CRIMINAL LAW
OVERALL DOCTRINE - CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION IN CRIMINAL LAW
Truates versus Bersamin G.R. No. one hundred thirty-eight nine hundred sixty-two, October four, two thousand two
Article two. Application of Provisions
Visiting Forces Agreement, Article Five
Article two - Territoriality / Foreign Merchant Vessel / French Rule versus English Rule
French versus English Rule
Article two - Territoriality / Foreign Vessel / Illegal Importation
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE TWO
Three. People versus Lol-lo and Saraw
Article two - Territoriality / Piracy / Exception to Territoriality
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE TWO
Article two - Territoriality / Transitory or Continuing Offense / R.A. No. nine two six two
FRENCH RULE vs. ENGLISH RULE
HOW THE FOUR CASES CONNECT TO ARTICLE TWO
Universal jurisdiction over piracy
Transitory/continuing offense
Article three, Revised Penal Code
One. People versus Ah Chong
Article three - Dolo / Mistake of Fact / Criminal Intent
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE THREE
Article three - Mistake of Fact / Negligence / Dolo or Culpa
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE THREE
Three. People versus Gianne Carla Thanaraj
Article three - Dolo / Intent / Self-Defense / Mistake of Fact
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE THREE
Four. Acharon versus People
Article three - Dolo / Criminal Intent / Specific Intent
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE THREE
ACHARON equals specific intent
CULPA Imprudence or negligence
"How are these cases related to Article three?"
Kinds of crimes: Mala in se versus Mala prohibita
One. United States versus GO CHICO
Mala Prohibita - Criminal Intent
CONNECTION TO MALA PROHIBITA
MEMORY AID: GO CHICO equals ACT, NOT INTENT
Mala Prohibita - B.P. Blg. twenty-two - Intent
CONNECTION TO MALA PROHIBITA
Three. PEOPLE versus LACERNA
Mala Prohibita - Dangerous Drugs - Intent to Commit the Crime versus Intent to Perform the Act
VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION
Four. GARCIA versus COURT OF APPEALS
Mala In Se Exception under Special Law versus Criminal Intent
Five. YSIDORO versus PEOPLE
Mala Prohibita - Technical Malversation - Intent
CONNECTION TO MALA PROHIBITA
Art. Four. Criminal Liability
Article Four(One) - Wrongful act different from that intended / Direct, natural and logical consequence
Two. PEOPLE versus MANANQUIL
Article Four(One) - Praeter intentionem / Natural and logical consequence
Three. U.S. versus BROBST
Article Four(One) - Natural and logical consequences
Four. PEOPLE versus BALMORES
Article Four(Two) - Impossible Crime / Inadequate or Ineffectual Means
Five. INTOD versus COURT OF APPEALS
Article four (two) - Impossible Crime / Factual Impossibility
Six. PEOPLE versus DOMASIAN
Article four (two) - Impossible Crime versus Consummated Crime
OVERALL CONNECTION TO ARTICLE FOUR
Common rule: INTENTIONAL FELONY plus
Article five. Duty of Court
One. PEOPLE versus ORIFON
Article five - Clearly Excessive Penalty / Recommendation for Executive Clemency
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE five
Two. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS versus ANG CHO KIO
Article five - Duty of Courts / Application of Law / Separation of Judicial and Executive Functions
CONNECTION TO ARTICLE five
Court encounters legal issue
ARTICLE five CONCEPT Clearly excessive penalty
Two. Penalty is clearly excessive.
This is People versus Orifon.
Art. Six. Stages of Commission
RELEVANT REFERENCES AND ILLUSTRATIVE DECISIONS
Tan survived. Trinidad was initially charged with frustrated murder. ISSUE.
Three. People versus Lopez.
ARTICLE six CONNECTION Overt acts +
Five. People versus Lamahang
OVERALL CONNECTION TO ARTICLE six
ARTICLE six - ATTEMPTED FELONY STUDY MAP
Three. NOT ALL ACTS OF EXECUTION
Four. FAILURE IS NOT VOLUNTARY
Most important distinction:
"What is the connection of these cases to ARTICLE six?"
Two. People versus Campuhan
Three. Medina versus People
Under Orita and Campuhan:
"How are People versus Orita, People versus Campuhan, and Medina versus People connected to Article six?"
degree of penile penetration required for consummation. L - LEGAL BASIS
Article six - Consummated Theft
ARTICLE six CONNECTION Taking property belonging to another
Three. PEOPLE versus HERNANDEZ
Article six - Consummated Rape / Slight Penetration
VERY IMPORTANT: AGAO versus HERNANDEZ
ADIAO - SPECIAL IMPORTANCE TO ARTICLE SIX
Article Eight. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. - Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
One. PEOPLE versus LABABO
MEMORY AID Two. MACAPAGAL-ARROYO versus PEOPLE
ARTICLE EIGHT CONNECTION Three. PEOPLE versus CALLAO
Article eight - Conspiracy; Mastermind; Act of One is Act of All
Five. DUNGO versus PEOPLE
Topic: Article eight - Conspiracy in Hazing FACTS
Six. PALAOAG versus PEOPLE
Article eight - Conspiracy to Commit Estafa
COMPARISON OF THE CASES CASE
ARTICLE EIGHT - MOST IMPORTANT RULES TO MEMORIZE
Two. DIRECT AGREEMENT IS NOT ALWAYS NECESSARY
Three. MERE PRESENCE IS NOT ENOUGH
Four. MASTERMIND CAN BE LIABLE
Five. ASSOCIATION IS NOT CONSPIRACY
"What is the connection of these cases to Article Eight of the Revised Penal Code?"
Article Nine. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies
Article Ten. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code
Article Eleven. Justifying circumstances
The People of the Philippines versus Cunigunda Boholst-Caballero, G.R. Number L-two three two four nine, November twenty-five, nineteen seventy-four
ISSUES: WHETHER the accused-appellant, Mamerto Narvaez, acted in legitimate defense of property and rights.
Avoidance of greater evil (State of Necessity)