Crimes against Property
R.A. 10951 – amended the threshold amounts for crimes against property as well as the amount
of penalties for certain felonies
ARTICLE 308 – Theft
- most basic crime against property; base form of robbery and estafa
- Elements:
1. the taking of personal property
2. the property belongs to another
3. the taking away was done with intent of gain
4. the taking away was done without the consent of the owner
5. the taking away is accomplished without violence or intimidation against person or force
upon things
- first element
- “personal property” – any personal property, tangible or intangible, corporeal or
incorporeal, and capable of appropriation which is not considered real property
- “taking” – is deemed complete from the moment the offender gains possession over the
thing even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same; does not require asportation –
the property stolen need not be carried away from the place of the crime
- the fact that he was not able to run away with it is inconsequential – consummated theft
(example)
- not able to completely gain possession – attempted theft (example)
- NO frustrated theft because it is deemed consummated the moment the offender gains
possession of the subject property, no matter how quick that moment should be
- second element
- Miranda v. People – SC held that as long as the property taken does not belong to the
offender, it is immaterial whether the offender he stole it from was the owner or the mere
possessor or even a thief himself
- third element
- can the thief interpose the defense that he had no intent to keep the subject property?
– NO. The essence of intent to gain is the intent to deprive another of his property either
for gain or out of wantonness or malice to deprive another of his right in the thing taken.
- is there theft if a person simply steals back his stolen property?
– NO. There was no intent to gain where the taker honestly believes the property is his
own or that of another and that he has a right to take possession of it for himself or for
another for the protection of the latter; must be honest and in good faith – Gaviola v.
People, GR No. 163927
- snatching – specie of theft
- hold up – specie of robbery
- other modes of committing theft – variations (3) of basic form of theft (p. 140)
- Duty upon finding lost property
1
mariahdiaz-1G
- US v. Carlos, GR No. 6295 – electricity can be the subject of theft with the use of jumpers; the
true test of what is a proper subject of larceny is whether it is capable of appropriation by another
than the owner
- Laurel v. Abrogar, GR No. 155076, 2006 and 2009 – PLDT; can international calls be stolen?
- 2006 decision – the int. calls (services) are not personal properties of PLDT, case was
dismissed
- 2009 resolution – to appropriate means to deprive the lawful owner of the thing, taking
includes any act intended to transfer possession which may be committed through the use
of the offender’s own hands or mechanical device
- commercial documents can likewise be the subject of theft
- Jacinto v. People, GR No. 162540 – impossible crime of theft (unfunded check)
- is there theft if offender steals a check (funded) but could not encash it?
- People v. Seranilla, GR No. L-54090 – stealing a check even if not in cash is
consummated theft; there was intent to gain
- when is theft qualified? – ARTICLE 310 (p. 141)
- 2. Grave abuse of confidence – there must be showing that the victim reposed confidence
upon the offender – making the property accessible to the employee is an indication that
the employer has confidence upon the employee
ARTICLE 293 – Robbery
- is committed by any person who takes a personal property belonging to another with intent
to gain by means of violence against or intimidation of any person or using force upon
things
- base form
ART. 294-298 – robbery by means of violence or intimidation of persons
ART. 299-305 – robbery by using force upon things
ARTICLE 294 – penalties
- Defines several special complex crimes (two or more crimes defined by RPC and which
provides a single penalty thereof) involving robbery; robbery must be the central
objective/primordial purpose and killing the victim was merely incidental
- 5 SCC (p. 133) – robbery with serious physical injuries, robbery with homicide, robbery
with rape, robbery with intentional mutilation, robbery with arson
- X killed Y. As X was fleeing from the crime scene, he noticed that Y was wearing a Rolex
watch. X took the watch. What crime? – 2 separate crimes of homicide/murder and theft
- If the killing is premeditated, can we rule out the SCC of Robbery with Homicide? – not
necessarily; killing may be premeditated or an afterthought as long as the central objective
is robbery
- Does it matter who (whether the robbery victim or a third person) or how many were killed?
– the victim can either or both be the robbery victim or a third person
- NO frustrated stage (Valenzuela v. People)
- Consider original intent of the offender!
- Hierarchy (p. 133) – the graver SCC will absorb the less grave SCC
- Robbery in relation to direct bribery – voluntarily versus robbery through
intimidation – out of fear
2
mariahdiaz-1G
ARTICLE 295 – aggravating circumstances – generic or special
- Special – max. penalty imposed regardless of mitigating circumstances
Robbery with force upon things
- Generally, this form of robbery is committed when the offender unlawfully entered a
building, or damaged doors, wardrobes, etc. in order to take a personal property
ARTICLE 299 – robbery in an inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to worship
- First 2 (inhabited place & public building) – ARTICLE 301
- Par. A – mode of entry
1. through an opening not intended for entrance/egress
2. breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or window
3. using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools
4. using fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority
- Par. B – means/mode of taking (regardless of mode of entry or if there is even an entry)
1. breaking doors, wardrobes, chests or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or
receptacle
2. taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the place of
robbery
- Y placed his phone on a table near a window. Outside, X smashed the window and
reached for the cellphone. What crime? – theft; not robbery because breaking a window
should be a mode of entry
- Same example, but this time the item was a jewelry box containing jewelry on the table. X
took the box. What crime? – robbery
- Suppose that X knocked on the door of Y. X pretended to be a public officer. Y allowed X
in. While Y was distracted, several men entered the house. One of them pointed a gun at
Y and declared a hold up. Y led the men to a vault. The men tied up Y and they left with
the vault. What crime? – Fransdilla v. People, GR No. 197562 – complex crime (elements
of two crimes were present at the same time) of robbery in an inhabited house by armed
men under Art. 299 AND robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons under
Art. 294
- Article 48 – penalty
Estafa (in general)
- Elements:
1. that the accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence, or by means of deceit
2. that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended
party or to a third person
- 3 classifications of estafa (ARTICLE 315)
1. Estafa with unfaithfulness or by abuse of confidence
2. Estafa by false pretenses
3. Estafa through fraudulent means
1. Estafa with unfaithfulness or by abuse of confidence
a. By altering the substance, etc.
b. Estafa by misappropriation (most popular kind)
- Elements:
3
mariahdiaz-1G
1. that money, goods, or other personal property be received by the offender in trust, or
on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving the duty to
make delivery of or to return the same, even though such obligation is guaranteed by a
bond
2. that there is conversion or diversion of such property by the person who has so received
it or a denial on her part that she received it
3. that such conversion, diversion or denial is to the injury of another (damage – monetary
loss or even temporary prejudice)
4. that there be demand for the return of the property (demand – not really an element)
- Estafa = material/physical possession + juridical possession
- Theft = material possession
- Juridical possession – a possession which gives the transferee a right over the thing
which the transferee may set up even against the owner (ex: retainer’s lien)
- X gave Y his phone for the latter to bring it to a repair shop. Instead, Y sold the phone
and kept the money for himself. What crime? – theft; material possession only
- Y borrowed an extra phone from X for one month. After one month, Y sold the phone.
What crime? – estafa; lending phone; material and juridical possession – contract of
commodatum – loan of property with obligation to return it
- X bought 100 sacks of rice from Y. X paid a down payment of Php10,000. However, due
to lack of supply, Y was not able to deliver the rice. Despite repeated demands, Y failed
to return the Php10,000. What crime? – No crime. Civil liability only.
c. Taking advantage of a blank signature
2. Estafa by false pretenses
a. Estafa by means of deceit (2nd most popular form of estafa) – using fictitious name, or
false pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, etc.
- Elements:
1. That there must be a false pretense or fraudulent representation as to his power,
influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions
2. that such false pretense or fraudulent representation was made or executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud
3. that the offended party relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means
and was induced to part with his money or property
4. that, as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage
- there must be a NEXUS or CONNECTION between the false pretense and the damage
suffered by the victim. In other words, it must be the false pretense which induced the
victim to part with his money or property.
b. Altering quality, fineness, etc.
c. Pretending to have bribed any government employee
d. Estafa by postdating a check (another popular form of estafa)
- Elements:
1. the offender has postdated or issued a check in payment of an obligation contracted at
the time of the postdating or issuance
2. at the time of postdating or issuance of said check, the offender has no funds in the
bank or the funds deposited were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check
3. the payee has been defrauded
4
mariahdiaz-1G
- can also apply to personal checks; not manager’s check (as good as cash)
- has the same principle as estafa by means of deceit – the issuance of the worthless
check must have been what induced the victim to part with his money or property
- BP 22 (SPL, malum prohibitum – does not matter if you have criminal intent or not)
– bouncing checks law; punishes the mere issuance of worthless checks, regardless of
intent to deceive. In estafa by postdating, deceit is an element.
- X obtained a loan from Y in the amount of Php100,000. When the amount fell due, X
issued a personal check for the amount of Php112,000 to pay the principal amount plus
interest. The check was later dishonored. What crime? – BP 22; no estafa, because not
induced. If the obligation is pre-existing, there is no estafa.
- X was trying to borrow Php100,000 from Y. Given X’s history of not paying debts, Y was
apprehensive. To convince Y, X issued a postdated check of Php112,000 for the following
year. Upon due date of X’s loan, Y deposited the check but was dishonored. What crime?
– BP 22 and estafa. Worthless checks; it was the check which induced Y to part his money.
e. Obtaining food, refreshment, etc.
3. Estafa through fraudulent means
Estafa through falsification of public/commercial documents
- Complex crime proper, Art. 48 – one felony is a necessary means to commit another felony
- Necessary means – one felony must have been committed to facilitate the commission of
another felony; that felony CANNOT be an indispensable means to commit that other
felony; OTHERWISE the felony would simply be absorbed by the other felony – single
felony
- X wanted to sell a car to Y. For this purpose, X showed Y a purported ORCR showing that
X is the registered owner of the car. Convinced, Y bought the car from X. Later, it turned
out that the car belonged to someone else, and the ORCR was fake. What crime? – estafa
by means of deceit; falsification of public document – complex
- Can there be estafa through falsification of PRIVATE documents? – NO. Damage is also
an element; cannot co-exist; 2 felonies for a single act – double jeopardy (prohibited by
the Constitution)
- Malversation of public funds CAN be complexed with falsification of private documents –
Zuleta v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 185224
Syndicated estafa (PD 1689)
- Elements:
1. Estafa or other forms of swindling, as defined in Articles 315 and 316 of the RPC, is
committed
2. Estafa or swindling is committed by a syndicate of five or more persons
3. Defraudation results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang nayons”, or farmers, associations, or of
funds solicited by corporations/associations from the general public (KEY ELEMENT)
- in short – collected funds from the general public
- Example – investment scams
5
mariahdiaz-1G
PART 2
Article 306 – Brigandage
- is committed by at least four armed men, who form a band of robbers for the purpose of
committing robbery in the highway, or kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain
ransom or for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence.
- in brigandage, should the offenders have firearms? – Not necessarily; “armed” means other
weapons may be considered such as knives and bats
- 3rd paragraph, Article 306 – LEGAL PRESUMPTION (not conclusive)
- if any of the arms carried by any of the said persons be an unlicensed firearm, it should
be presumed that said persons are highway robbers or brigands; and in case of conviction,
the penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period
- special aggravating circumstance
- constitutional presumption of innocence – not violated
Burden of Proof Burden of Evidence
Duty of the party to go forward with his
Duty of a party to present the evidence
evidence to overthrow the prima facie
necessary to establish his claim
evidence established against him
The burden of evidence shifts from one side to
In criminal cases, the burden of proof always
another depending on the exigencies of the
lies with the prosecution
trial
Article 307 – Aiding and Abetting (or Protecting) a Band of Brigands
1. Band of brigands as defined under Art. 306
2. The offender knows them to be a band of brigands
3. The offender either gives them information of the movement of the police or acquires
property taken by the brigands
Highway Robbery/Brigandage under PD 532 or “Anti-Piracy and Highway Robbery Act”
- the seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful purposes, or the taking away
of the property of another by means of violence against or intimidation of person or force upon
things of other unlawful means, committed by any person on any Philippine Highway
- already refers to the act of highway robbery itself
- there must be a showing that the accused or highway robbers/brigands are regularly hanging or
roaming on the highway and chancing indiscriminately upon travelers who they can rob or seize
for extortion (elements)
Robbery by a band (RPC) Highway robbery (PD 532)
Place of the
Not important Philippine Highway
commission
Number of
At least four armed men May be committed by a single person
malefactors
The offenders are regularly hanging
The crime can be committed even
or roaming on highways and
Manner of though the commission thereof is
indiscriminately chancing upon
commission an isolated incident and the victim
travelers who they can rob or seize
is pre-determined
for extortion
6
mariahdiaz-1G
Article 312 – Occupation of real property or Usurpation of real rights in property
- Elements:
1. The offender takes possession of any real property or usurps any real rights in property
2. Such real property or real rights belong to another
3. Violence against or intimidation of persons is used
4. Intent to gain
Trespass to Dwelling Usurpation
No intent to gain; intention is simply to violate Crime against property; there is an element of
the sanctity of the victim’s home intent to gain
Article 313 – Altering Boundaries or Landmarks
Article 314 – Fraudulent (or Culpable) Insolvency
- is committed by any person who shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors
- “abscond” – the debtor causes his property to be registered to someone else so that the creditors
cannot run after those properties
- differentiate with Article 1381 of the Civil Code (accion pauliana):
The ff. contracts are rescissible:
(3) Those undertaken in fraud of creditors when the latter cannot in any manner collect
the claims due them
- Art. 314 – he can still collect in other manners and likewise file a case for fraudulent insolvency
Swindling
Article 316 – Other Forms of Swindling (p. 150)
Article 317 – Swindling a Minor
- committed by any person who induces a minor to assume an obligation or to give a release or
execute a transfer of a property right in consideration of some loan or money, credit or any other
personal property by taking advantage of the minor’s inexperience or emotions or feelings to his
detriment
- minors are incapable of giving consent to contracts
Article 318 – Other Deceits
- catch-all provision for any other kind of deceit
- committed by any person who for profit or gain shall interpret dreams, make forecasts, tell
fortunes or take advantage of the credibility of the public or in any other similar manner
Article 319 – Chattel Mortgage (p. 151)
- penalizes the disposition of personal property, mortgage, or pledge in accordance with the
chattel mortgage law
- Section 4 – requires that the mortgage or pledge must be registered with the Register of Deeds;
if not, Art. 319 will not apply
Arson
- two laws dealing with Arson:
- Article 320, RPC – Destructive Arson (as amended by R.A. 7659)
- PD 1613 – Simple Arson (Sections 1 and 3)
7
mariahdiaz-1G
Destructive Arson (Art. 320)
1. One or more buildings or edifices
2. Devoted to public
3. Devoted to transportation
4. Public utilities
5. Destroying evidence/insurance fraud
6. Committed by two or more persons
7. Arsenal, shipyard
8. Inflammable or explosives
Simple Arson (Sections 1 and 3, PD 1613)
- 7 enumerations (p. 152)
- 1. Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of another, or his own property
exposing to danger the life/property of another (Sec. 1)
Destructive Arson v. Simple Arson
- X burned down a residential home. What crime was committed? – Simple Arson; pursuant to
par. 3, Sec. 3, PD 1613 – any inhabited house or dwelling
- Take note: Art. 320, par. 1: “One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to one single act of
burning, or as a result of simultaneous burnings, or committed on several or different occasions.”
- catch-all provision
- People v. Soriano, G.R. No. 142565
- burned houses, NOT building or edifices
- The acts committed under Art. 320 of the RPC constituting Destructive Arson are
characterized as heinous crimes for being grievous, odious and hateful offenses and
which, by reason of their inherent or manifest wickedness, viciousness, atrocity and
perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and norms of decency
and morality in a just, civilized and ordered society. On the other hand, acts constituting
Simple Arson are crimes with a lesser degree of perversity.
1. If an accused is to be charged with destructive arson under paragraph 1, Art. 320, the
information must specifically allege buildings or edifices which are the terms used by
paragraph 1
2. It must be characterized as heinous and it should represent a greater degree of
perversity (Subjective element)
Elements of Simple Arson
1. There must be intentional burning
2. What is intentionally burned are the properties enumerated under PD 1613
3. (IMPLIED) The burning must not constitute destructive arson under the RPC
- Distinction – Art. 320 is given priority; because it’s a later provision/law as amended by RA 7659
Arson in relation to Homicide
- X burned down a building, not knowing that someone was inside. That person inside died. What
crime? – Destructive or Simple Arson depending on what kind of building was burned; if death
results, the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be imposed
- Homicide is already absorbed; cannot be charged separately
8
mariahdiaz-1G
- X plotted to kill Y. While Y was asleep at night, X burned down his house, resulting to the death
of Y. What crime? – Murder, qualified by the use of fire; cannot be Arson because it is a crime
against property, so if the offender had intent to kill and he burned the house as means to kill, that
is not Arson but Murder
- X went to the home of Y and killed him there. Then, X burned down the house to conceal the
murder. What crime? – two separate crimes of Homicide/Murder and Destructive Arson (par. 5,
Art. 320)
Summary
- If the main objective is to burn the property, and the offender had no intent to kill, or if the killing
is merely ancillary, the crime is Arson, and Homicide/Murder will be absorbed.
- If the main objective was to kill the person by means of burning a building, the crime is Murder
qualified by the use of fire, while Arson is deemed absorbed.
- If the objective is to kill the person and thereafter the building is burned to conceal the crime,
then there will be two separate offenses of Murder and Arson.
Attempted Arson – if the offender was about to light the fire but was immediately apprehended
Frustrated Arson – if the fire has been lit but no part of the building had been burned
- US v. Valdez, G.R. No. 14128
- the fact of setting fire to a jute sack and a rag, soaked with kerosene oil and placed beside an
upright of the house and a partition of the entresol of the building, thus endangering the burning
of the latter, constitutes the crime of frustrated arson of an inhabited house, on an occasion when
some of its inmates were inside of it. The crime is classified only as frustrated arson, inasmuch
as the defendant performed all the acts conceive to the burning of said house, but nevertheless,
owing to causes independent of his will, the criminal act which he intended was not produced.
The offense committed cannot be classified as consummated arson by the burning of the said
house, for the reason that no part of the building had yet commenced to burn, although, as the
piece of sack and the rag, soaked in kerosene oil, had been placed near partition of the entresol,
the partition might have started to burn, had the fire not been put out on time.
Article 327 – Malicious Mischief
- any person who shall deliberately cause the property of another any damage not falling
within the terms of the next preceding chapter
Article 332 – Absolutory Cause or Exemption from Criminal Liability for Theft, Swindling,
or Malicious Mischief
- who are exempted from criminal liability? – p. 154
- does not apply to robbery and arson
- no other crimes accompanied the theft or estafa
- does not apply if other offenses are complexed. It also does not benefit conspirators of
the offender who is related to the victim.
9
mariahdiaz-1G
