CRIMINAL LIABILITY article 4

CRIMINAL LIABILITY 
ARTICLE 4, RPC 
Art. 4. CRIMINAL LIABILITY shall  
be incurred: 
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act
done be different from that which he intended. 
3
Art. 4. CRIMINAL LIABILITY shall be  
incurred: 
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against
persons or property, were it not for the inherent  impossibility of its
accomplishment or on  account of the employment of inadequate  or
ineffectual means. 
4
Criminal Liability 
✗ One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the
consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom, 
whether foreseen or intended or not. 
✗ Rationale: el que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado (he
who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused) 
5
Art. 4(1) is only applicable if the accused committed an intentional felony 
✗ X, who attempted to commit suicide by jumping from a building, fell on Z.
As a consequence, Z died. Art. 4(1) is not applicable because X is not 
committing an intentional felony. Suicide is not an act punishable under the
RPC. Hence, X is exempt from criminal liability due to the circumstance of
accident. 
6
Criminal Liability 
“committing a felony” 
✗ When a person has not committed a felony, he is not criminally liable for
the result which is not intended 
7
Criminal Liability 
”although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended” 
The causes which may produce a result different from that which the
offender intended are: 
✗ Error in personae – mistake in the identity of the victim 
✗ Aberratio ictus – mistake in the blow 
✗ Praeter intentionem – injurious result is greater than that intended 
8
Error in personae 
Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony even
though the victim against whom the wrongful act is committed is different
from the intended victim because of mistake of identity. 
✗ Pedro shot and killed a person believed to be Juan. However, it turned
out the victim is Raul. Pedro is 
liable for the wrongful act done (killing Raul) although it is different from the
wrongful act intended (killing Juan) 
9
Mistake of fact vs. error in personae 

MISTAKE OF FACT 
✗ Is a defense since it negates dolo 
✗ Intention is to commit a lawful act – mistake pertains to facts which
constitutes the requisites of J/E/A 
ERROR IN PERSONAE 
✗ Not a defense because of Art. 4 which makes one liable for
the consequence of committing a felony 
✗ Intention is to commit an intentional felony 
10
Aberratio ictus 
Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony
although the victim against whom the wrongful act is committed be different
from the intended victim because of mistake of blow. 
✗ Pedro shot and killed Juan. But because of mistake of blow, Raul was
also hit by the bullet and died as a consequence. Pedro is liable for the
wrongful act done (killing Juan and Raul) although it is different from the
wrongful act intended (killing Juan). 
11
Praeter intentionem 
Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony even
though the wrongful act done be graver than which he intended. 
✗ Pedro boxed Juan. However, Juan suffered a heart attack and died as a
consequence. Pedro is liable for the wrongful act done (killing Juan)
although it differs from the wrongful act intended (inflicting injury on Juan).
Pedro is liable for the direct, natural, and logical consequence of his
intentional and felonious act of boxing Juan. 
12
Natural and logical consequence of a felony 
Alvarado vs. People 
✗ The accused was committing a felony when he boxed the victim and hit
him with the bottle. Hence, that fact that the victim was previously afflicted
with a heart ailment does not alter accused’s liability for his death. 
✗ Where death results as a direct consequence of the use of illegal
violence, the mere fact that the diseased or weakened condition of the
injured person contributed to his death, does not relieve the illegal
aggressor of criminal responsibility. 
13
Liability for the consequent death caused in trying to escape X was in
charge of the men working in a small boat. X moved towards the victim, Y,
with a big knife in hand, threatening to stab him. Y, believing that he is in
great and immediate peril, jumped into the water where he drowned. X was
found guilty of homicide. 
✗ If a man creates in another man’s mind an immediate sense of danger
which causes such person to try to escape, and in so doing he injures
himself, the person who creates such a state of mind is responsible for the
injuries which result. 
✗ X is liable for the wrongful act done (homicide) although it differs from
the wrongful act intended (threat). 
14
Proximate cause 
✗ The felony committed must be the proximate cause if the resulting
injury. 
✗ Proximate cause is that cause, which in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury,
and without which the result would not have occurred. 
15
Proximate cause and efficient cause 

Proximate cause 
A person committing a felony is criminally liable for all the natural and
logical consequences resulting therefrom although the wrongful act done is
different from that which he intended. 
Efficient cause 
Efficient cause is the working cause; the act that produces the death of the
victim. 
The offender is liable for the death of the victim if his felonious act is the
efficient cause of such death. 
Resulting injury or death

16 
Efficient intervening cause 
✗ A new and independent force, which breaks the causal connection
between the felony and the death. In sum, it is a force that intervenes after
the commission of the felony, which efficiently causes the death of the
victim. 
✗ If there is an efficient intervening cause, the accused is not liable for the
death of the victim. In such a case, the death of the victim is not the logical,
direct, and natural consequence of his wrongful act. 
17
Requisites of efficient intervening cause 
1. It must be an active force; 
✗ It must have something to do with the death of 
the victim. 
2. It must be a foreign force. 
✗ It must be a distinct fact absolutely foreign to 
the felonious act of the accused. 
18
Article 4 and culpable felony 
✗ Article 4 and Article 365 contain the rule on proximate cause. 
✗ If the proximate cause of the death of the victim is an intentional felony,
the accused is liable for homicide because of Article 4. 
✗ If the proximate cause of the death of the victim is culpa, the accused is
liable for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide under Article 365. 
19
2
Impossible crime 
ARTICLE 4(2), RPC 
Impossible crime 
✗ Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person performing an act which
would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the
employment of inadequate of ineffectual means. 
21
✗ There is only one instance where the law prescribes a penalty for  
having a criminal intention  alone, and that is the provision  on impossible
crime. Art. 59,  RPC prescribes penalty for  impossible crime on the basis
of  the criminal tendency of the  offender. 
22
Requisites of impossible crime 
1. Offender performs an act which would have been an offense against
person or property. 
2. Offender must perform an act with evil intent. 
3. Offender did not commit the offense because of the impossibility of its
accomplishment or employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. 
4. Offender in performing an act is not violating another provision of the
law. 
23
1. Offender performs an act which would have been an offense against
person or property. 

Crimes against Person 

✗ Parricide, murder, homicide, infanticide, abortion, duel, physical injuries,
and rape. 
Crimes against Property 
✗ Robbery, brigandage, theft, usurpation, culpable insolvency, swindling
and other deceit (estafa), chattel mortgage, arson, and malicious mischief. 
24
1. Offender performs an act which would have been an offense against
person or property. 
✗ An offender for raping a dead person without knowing that she was
already dead may now be held liable for impossible crime. 
✗ The accused shall incur criminal liability for performing an act which
would have been rape were it not for the inherent impossibility of
its accomplishment. 
25
2. Offender must perform an act with evil intent. 
✗ A, who wanted to kill B, looked for him. When A saw B, he found out that
B was already dead. To satisfy his grudge, A stabbed B in his breast 3
times 
with a knife. This is not an impossible crime because A knew that B was
already dead. There was no evil intent to kill on the part of A, because he
knew that he could not cause injury to B. 
✗ Impossible crime is being punished because of the criminal tendency of
the accused. 
26
3. Offender did not commit the offense because of the impossibility of its
accomplishment or employment of adequateor ineffectual means 
✗ The act intended by the offender must be by its nature one impossible of
accomplishment. There 
must be either: 
1. Legal Impossibility; or 
2. Factual Impossibility or physical impossibility of accomplishing the
intended act 
…in order to qualify the act as an impossible crime. 
27
Legal impossibility 
✗ Legal impossibility occurs where the intended acts, even if completed,
would not amount to a crime. 
The impossibility of killing a person already dead 
falls in this category. 
28
Factual impossibility 
✗ Factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to
the actor or beyond his 
control prevent the consummation of the intended 
crime. 
✗ Ex. A man who puts his hand in the pocket of the victim’s coat with the
intention to steal the latter’s wallet but finds the pocket 
empty. 
✗ Taking personal property of another with intent to gain and without
consent of the latter is theft. One cannot possibly take 
something that is not there. 
29
Inadequate and ineffectual means 
✗ If the accused with intent to kill thought that the salt, that he mixed with
the coffee of another, is arsenic powder, he is liable 
for impossible crime of murder. Poison used as a means to kill is 
ineffectual. 
✗ The offender with intent to kill mixed arsenic with the coffee of another;
but the latter did not die due to inadequacy of arsenic. 
The offender is liable for impossible crime. Poison used as a 
means to kill is inadequate. 
✗ Trying to shoot another with an empty revolver is an impossible crime of
homicide. 
30
4. Offender in performing an act is not violating another provision of the
law. 
✗ Where the offender unlawfully entered the house and took a watch that
turned out to be his own, he is liable for trespass to dwelling and not
impossible crime. The intention of the offender in taking the watch is to
commit robbery. But it is legally impossible to commit robbery since the
property belongs to him. However, the act of the offender, which shows
criminal tendency to commit robbery, constitutes another crime, and that
is, 
trespassing. 
31
4. Offender in performing an act is not violating another provision of the
law. 
✗ X, in miniskirt, while strolling around Rizal Park, caught the attention of Y
because of X’s charm and beauty. Y 
gave X a lift in Y’s car and brought X to a motel where he 
tried to rape X. Y failed in his attempt because X turned 
out to be a male. The intention of Y in abducting X is to 
rape her. But it is impossible to rape X since X is a male. 
However, the act of Y, which shows criminal tendency to 
commit rape, constitutes another crime, and that is acts of 
lasciviousness. In AL, unlike in rape, the gender of the 
victim is not important. Hence, Y is liable for acts of 
lasciviousness and not impossible crime of rape. 
32
Dispensable requisite 
✗ If the act committed by the accused constitutes an impossible crime and
a lesser crime, the fourth requisite of an impossible crime can be
dispensed 
with, and thus, the accused should be convicted of an impossible crime. 
✗ Ex. Intod vs. CA – Impossible crime (arresto mayor) and alarm and
scandal (arresto menor) 
✗ By convicting the accused of impossible crime, the accused did not
escape the penal consequence of a graver 
crime since the penalty for alarm and scandal is lesser 
than that for impossible crime. 
33