Showing posts from January, 2019

Immediate Cause; Felonious Act; Criminal Liability

Immediate Cause

The conduct of wife A aroused the ire of her husband B. Incensed with anger almost beyond his control, B could not help but inflict physical injuries on A. Moments after B started hitting A with his fists, A suddenly complained of severe chest pains. B realizing that A was indeed in serious trouble, immediately brought her to the hospital. Despite efforts to alleviate A's pains, she died of heart attack. It turned out that she had been suffering from a lingering heart ailment.

What crime, if any, could B be held guilty of?

B could be held liable for parricide because his act of hitting his wife with his fist blows and therewith inflicting physical injuries on her, is felonious. A person committing a felonious act incurs criminal liability although the wrongful consequence is is different from what he intended.(Art.4, par.1, Revised Penal Code)

Although A died of heart attack, the said attack was generated by B's felonious act of hitting her with his fists. Such…

December 2018 Criminologist Licensure Examination Results

The Professional Regulation Commission (PRC) announces that 14,324 out of 41,341 passed the Criminologist Licensure Examination given by the Board of Criminology in the cities of

Manila, Antique, Baguio, Cagayan de Oro, Cebu, Cotabato, Davao,General Santos, Iloilo, Legazpi, Lucena,Occidental Mindoro, Pagadian,Palawan,Pangasinan,Tacloban, Tuguegarao and Zamboanga 
last December 2018. The results of examination with respect to eleven (11) examinees were withheld pending final determination of their liabilities under the rules and regulations governing licensure examination.

List of Successfull Examinees
Top 10 Examinees
Top Performing Schools

The members of the Board of Criminology who gave the licensure examination are

Hon. Ramil G. Gabao, Chairman; Hon. George O. Fernandez and Hon. Ruben A. Sta. Teresa, Members.
The results were released in fifteen (15) working days from the last day of examination.

From January 28 to February 6, 2019, registration for the issuance of Professional Identif…

December 2018 Criminologist Licensure Examination Top Performing Schools

The top performing schools in the December 2018 Criminologist Licensure Examination as  per Commission Resolution No. 2010-547 series of 2010: (with 50 or more examinees and with at least 80% passing percentage)

         Total Number of Examinees - 57
         Total Number Passed - 56
         Passing Percentage - 98.25%

         Total Number of Examinees - 53
         Total Number Passed - 51
         Passing Percentage - 96.23%

         Total Number of Examinees - 65
         Total Number Passed - 62
         Passing Percentage - 95.38%

         Total Number of Examinees - 63
         Total Number Passed - 60
         Passing Percentage - 95.24%

         Total Number of Ex…

December 2018 Criminologist Licensure Examination Top 10

The successful examinees who garnered the ten (10) highest places in the December 2018 Criminologist Licensure Examination are the following:

                    UNIVERSIDAD DE ZAMBOANGA (for.ZAEC) - 91.15

                     ARAULLO UNIVERSITY - 90.90

                     UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO-DAVAO CITY - 90.65

                    UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO-BANSALAN - 90.25

                    PHILIPPINE COLLEGE OF CRIMINOLOGY - 90.05

                    UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO-TAGUM - 89.90

                    UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO-DAVAO CITY - 89.85

                    BULACAN STATE UNIVERSITY (for.BCAT)-MALOLOS - 89.75

                    DAVAO CENTR…

What is an impossible crime?

2000 Bar Examination Question (Impossible Crime)

1. What is an impossible crime?
2. Is an impossible crime really a crime?

1. An impossible crime is an act which would be an offense against person or property, were if not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. (Art.4, par.2 RPC)

2. No, an impossible crime is not really a crime. It is only so-called because the act gives rise to criminal liability. But actually, no felony is committed. The accused is to be punished for his criminal tendency o propensity although no crime was committed.

Proximate Cause; Felonious Act; Criminal Liability

Proximate Cause | Felonious Act | Criminal Liability

Vicente hacked Anacleto with a bolo but the latter was able to parry it with his hand, causing upon him a two-inch wound on his right palm. Vicente was not able to hack Anacleto further because three policemen arrived and threatened to shoot Vicente if he did not drop his bolo. Vicente was accordingly charged by the police at the prosecutor's office for attempted homicide. Twenty-five days later, while the preliminary investigation was in progress, Anacleto was rushed to the hospital because of symptoms of tetanus infection on the two-inch wound inflicted by Vicente. Anacleto died the following day.

Can Vicente be eventually charged with homicide for the death of Anacleto? Explain.

Yes, Vicente may be charged of homicide for the death of Anacleto, unless the tetanus infection which developed 25 days later, was bough about by an efficient supervening cause. Vicente's felonious act of causing a two-inch wound on Anacleto's…

Felonious Act of Scaring; Criminal Liability

Felonious Act of Scaring (1996 Bar Examination Question)

Alexander, an escaped convict, ran amuck on board a Superlines bus bound for Manila from Bicol and killed ten (10) persons. Terrified by the incident, Carol and Benjamin who are passengers of the bus, jumped out of the window and while lying unconscious after  hitting the pavement of the road, were ran over and crushed to death by a fast moving Desert Fox bus tailing the Superlines bus.

Can Alexander be held liable for the death of Carol and Benjamin although he was completely unaware that the two jumped out of the bus? Explain.

Yes, Alexander can be held liable for the death of Carol and Benjamin because of felonious act of running was the proximate cause of the victim's death. The rule is that when a person, by a felonious act, generates in the mind of another a sense of imminent danger, prompting the latter to escape from or avoid such danger and in the process, sustain injuries or dies, the person committing the feloniou…

Criminal Liability; Destructive Arson

A, B, C, and D, all armed with armalites, proceeded to the house of X. Y, a neighbor of X, who happened to be passing by, pointed to the four culprits the room that X occupied. The four culprits peppered the room with bullets. Unsatisfied, A even threw a hand grenade that totally destroyed X's room. However, unknown to the four culprits, X was not inside the room and nobody was hit or injured during the incident.

Are A, B, C, and D liable for any crime? Explain.

Yes. A, B, C, and D are liable for destructive arson because of the destruction of the  room of X with the use of an explosive, the hand grenade. Liability for an impossible crime is to be imposed only if the act committed would not constitute any other crime  under the Revised Penal Code.

Although the fact involved are parallel to the case of Intod vs. Court of Appeals (215 SCRA 52), where it was ruled that the liability of the offender was for an  impossible crime, no hand grenade was used in said case, which constitute…

What is the doctrine of implied conspiracy?

The doctrine of implied conspiracy holds two or more persons participating in the commission of a crime collectively responsible and liable as co-conspirators although absent any agreement to that effect, when they act in concert, demonstrating unity of criminal intent and a common purpose or objective. The existence of a conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced from their criminal participation in pursuing the crime and thus the act of one shall be deemed the act of all.

State the concept of "implied conspiracy" and give its legal effects?

An "implied conspiracy" is one which is only inferred or deduced from the manner the participants in the commission of crime carried out its execution. Where the offenders acted in concert in the commission of the crime, meaning that their acts are coordinated or synchronized in a way indicative that they are pursuing a common criminal objective, they shall be deemed to be acting in conspiracy and their criminal liability shall …

Conspiracy; Flight to Evade Apprehension

Flight to Evade Apprehension

A and B, both store janitors, planned to kill their employer C, at midnight and take the money kept in the cash register. A and B together drew the sketch of the store, where they knew C would be sleeping, and planned the sequence of their attack. Shortly before midnight, A and B were ready to carry out the plan. When A was about to lift C's  Mosquito net to thrust his dagger, a police car with sirens blaring passed by. Scared, B ran out of the store and fled, while A went on to stab C to death, put the money in the bag, and ran outside to look for B. The latter was nowhere in sight. Unknown to him, B had already left the place.

What was the participation and corresponding criminal liability of each, if any?

There was an express conspiracy between A and B to kill C and take the latter's money. The planned killing and taking of the money appears to be intimately related as component  crimes, hence a special complex crime of Robbery with Homicide. Th…

Conspiracy; Complex Crime with Rape

Jose, Domingo, Manolo, and Fernando, armed with bolos, at about one o'clock in the  morning, robbed a house at a desolate place where Danilo, his wife, and three daughters were living. While the four were in the process of ransacking Danilo's house, Fernando, noticing that one of Danilo's daughters was trying to get away, ran after her and finally caught up with her in a thicket (a dense group of bushes or trees), somewhat distant from  the house. Fernando, before bringing back the daughter to the house, raped her first. Thereafter, the four carted away the belongings of Danilo and his family.

a. What crime did Jose, Domingo, Manolo, and Fernando commit?

b. Suppose, after the robbery, the four took turns in raping the daughters of Danilo inside the latter's house, but before they left, they killed the whole family to prevent identification, what crime did the four commit?

a. Jose, Domingo, and Manolo committed robbery, while Fernando committed complex crime  of Robber…

Conspiracy; Common Felonious Purpose

Common Felonious Purpose

At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino and Raffy were walking along Padre Faura street, Manila, Johnny hit them with a rock injuring Dino at the back. Raffy approached Dino, but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny, and Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then Bobby stabbed Dino. Steve, Danny, Nonoy, and Johnny kept on hitting Dino and Raffy with rocks. As a result, Dino died. Bobby, Steve, Danny, Nonoy, and Johnny were charged with homicide.

Is there conspiracy in this case?

Yes, there is conspiracy among the offenders, as manifested by there concerted actions against the victims, demonstrating a common felonious purpose of assaulting the victims. The existence of the conspiracy can be inferred or deduced from the manner the offenders acted in commonly attacking Dino and Raffy with rocks, thereby demonstrating a unit of  criminal design to inflict harm on their victims.

Conspiracy, Co-Conspirator | 1998 Bar Exam Question

Conspiracy, Co-Conspirator | 1998 Bar Exam Question

Juan and Arturo devised a plan to murder Joel. In a narrow alley near Joel's house, Juan will hide behind the big lamppost and shoot Joel when the latter passes through on his way to work. Arturo will come from the other end of the alley and simultaneously shoot Joel from behind.

On the appointed day, Arturo was apprehended by the authorities before reaching the alley. When Juan Shot Joel as planned, he was unaware that Arturo was arrested earlier.

Discuss the criminal liability of Arturo, if any.

Suggested Answer:

Arturo, being one of the two who devised the plan to murder Joel, thereby becomes a co-principal by direct conspiracy. What is needed only is an overt act and both will incur criminal liability.

Arturo's liability as a conspirator arose from his participation in jointly devising the criminal plan with Juan, to kill Jose. And it was pursuant to that conspiracy that Juan killed Joel.

The conspiracy here is actual, no…

Father of Podoscopy | Edmond Locard

Father of Podoscopy

Edmond Locard is considered as the father of Poroscopy. He is also considered as the father of Podoscopy.

Podoscopy is the scientific examination or study of the soles of the feet.

The Father of Podoscopy, Edmond Locard, was a forensic scientist, popularly regarded as  the “Sherlock Holmes of France”.

Born in Saint-Chamond on November 13, 1877, Locard studied medicine in Lyon. His  interests ultimately branched to include science and medicine in legal matters.

He began his professional career by assisting Alexandre Lacassagne, a criminologist  and professor. Locard eventually partnered with anthropologist Alphonse Bertillon, who was known for his system of identifying criminals based on their body measurements.

During World War I Locard worked with the French Secret Service as a medical examiner.  He identified the cause and location of soldiers’ deaths by analyzing their uniforms. In 1910 the Lyon Police Department granted Locard the opportunity to create the firs…

Avoidance of Greater Evil | Conspiracy

Avoidance of Greater Evil

BB and CC, both armed with knives, attacked FT. The victim's son, ST, upon seeing the attack, drew his gun but was prevented from shooting the attackers by AA, who grappled with him for possession of the gun.

FT died from knife wounds. AA, BB, and CC were charged with murder.

In his defense, AA invoked the justifying circumstance of avoidance of greater evil or injury, contending that by preventing ST from shooting BB and CC, he merely avoided a greater evil.

Will AA's defense prosper?

No, AA's defense will not prosper because obviously there was a conspiracy among BB, CC, and AA, such that the principle that when there is a conspiracy, the act of one is the  act of all, shall govern.

The act of ST, the victim's son, appears to be a legitimate defense of relatives; hence, justified as a defense of his father against the unlawful aggression by BB and CC. ST's act to defend his father's life, cannot be regarded as an evil inasmuch as it …