Define/distinguish the following terms:
Mr. X has always been infatuated with Ms. Y. Scored by Ms. Y’s disregard for his feelings towards her, Mr. X came up with a plan to abduct Ms. Y in order to have carnal knowledge of her with the help of his buddies, A, B, and C.
On the day decided to carry out the plan, and while surreptitiously waiting for Ms. Y, C had a change of heart and left. This notwithstanding, Mr. X, A and B continued with the plan and abducted Ms. Y by forcefully taking her to a deserted house away from the city. There, Mr. X restrained Ms. Y’s arms, while A held her legs apart. B stood as a lookout. Mr. X was then able to have carnal knowledge of Ms. Y, who was resisting throughout the entire ordeal.
Consequently, Mr. X was charged with the crime of Forcible Abduction under the Revised Penal Code.
Mr. O, a 75-year old retiree who has been a widower for the last ten (10) years, believed that, at past 70, he is licensed to engaged in voyeurism to satisfy his lustful desires. If not peeping into his neighbors’ room through his powerful single-cylinder telescope, he would trail young, shapely girls along the hallways and corridors of shopping malls. While going up the escalator, he stayed a step behind a mini-skirted, 20-year old, and, in the heat of the moment, put his hand on her left buttock and massaged it.
The girl screamed and hollered for help.
Mr. O was thus apprehended and charged with Acts of Lasciviousness under
Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code. Mr. O’s counsel, however, claimed that
Mr. O should only be charged with the crime of Unjust Vexation.
the contention of Mr. O’s counsel tenable? Explain. (2.5%)
In dire need of money, Mr. R decided to steal from his next-door neighbor, Mrs. V. On the night of May 5, 2010, Mr. R proceeded with his plan and entered Mrs. V’s bedroom by breaking one of the windows from the outside. Finding Mrs. V sound asleep, he silently foraged through her cabinet, and stashed all the bundles of cash and jewelries he could find.
As Mr. R was about to leave, he heard Mrs. V shout, “Stop or I will shoot you!”, and when he turned around, he saw Mrs. V cocking a rifle which was pointed at him. Fearing for his life, Mr. R then lunged at Mrs. V and was able to wrest the gun away from her. Thereafter, Mr. R shot Mrs. V, which resulted in her death. Mr. R’s deeds were discovered on the very same night as he was seen by law enforcement authorities fleeing the crime scene.
In August 2018, B
entered into a contract with S for the purchase of the latter’s second-hand car
in the amount of P400,00.00, payable in two (2) equal monthly installments.
Simultaneous with the signing of the contract and S’s turnover of the car keys,
B executed, issued and delivered (2) post-dated checks, all payable to S, with
the assurance that they will all be honored on their respective maturity dates.
all two (2) checks were dishonored for being drawn against insufficient funds.
Consequently, notices therefor were duly issued to and received by B, but this
notwithstanding, no payment arrangements were made by him. Further, upon S’s
investigation, it was uncovered that B’s checking account had only P50,000.00
when it was opened in June 2018 and no further deposits were made after that. S
also found out that B knew fully well of such circumstance at the tome he
issued the two (2) checks.
What crime/s should B be charged
with and for how many counts? Explain. (5%)
Mr. A has a long-standing feud with Mr. B. As payback for Mr. B’s numerous transgressions against him, Mr. A planned to burn down Mr. B’s rest house.
One night, Mr. A went to the rest house
and started pouring gasoline on its walls. However, just as Mr. A had lit the
match for burning, he was discovered by house on fire. Mr. A was then changed
with Frustrated Arson.
Mr. L is a newspaper reporter who writes about news items concerning the judiciary. Mr. L believed that members of the judiciary can be criticized and exposed for the prohibited acts that they commit virtue of the public nature of their offices. Upon receiving numerous complaints from private citizens, Mr. L released a scathing newspaper expose involving Judge G and his alleged acts constituting graft and corruption. Consequently, Mr. L was charged with the crime of Libel.
In response, Mr. L contended that truth is a valid defense in Libel and in this relation, claimed that he was only exposing the truth regarding Judge g’s misdeeds. Further, Mr. L contended that in any event, his exposé on Judge G is based on the complaints he received from private citizens, and as such, should be deemed as a mere fair commentary on a matter of public interest.
After a successful entrapment operation by the
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, Mr. D, a known drug pusher, was arrested on
January 15, 2019 for having been caught in flagrante delicto selling a
pack of shabu, a prohibited drug, to the poseur-buyer. Consequently, Mr.
D was frisked by the arresting officer, and aluminum foils, plastic lighter,
and another plastic sachet of shabu were obtained likewise inventoried
and photographed at the place of arrest. Throughout the process, a media
representative was able to witness the conduct of the marking, inventory, and
photography of the seized items in the presence of Mr. D.
Mr. D was then charged with the crimes of Illegal
Sale and illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs. In defense, he lamented that
the chain of custody procedure under Section 21, Article II of the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as amended, was not followed because
only a media representative was a very credible reporter and as such, presence
of any other witness was unnecessary.
X and Y approached Mayor Z and requested him to solemnize their marriage. On the day of the ceremony, X and Y proceeded to Mayor Z’s office but he was not there. Mayor Z’s chief of staff, Mr. U, however, represented that he himself can solemnize their marriage and just have Mayor Z sign the marriage certificate when the latter comes back. Consequently, upon X and Y’s assent, Mr. U solemnized the marriage, despite his lack of authority therefor.
Distinguish Rebellion under the Revised Penal Code
and Terrorism under Human Security Act of 2007. (2.5%)
-END OF PART I-
M Malaysian visiting the Philippines,
was about to depart for Hongkong via and Indonesian-registered commercial
vessel. While on board the vessel which was still docked at the port of Manila,
she saw her mortal enemy. Ms. A, an Australian citizen. Ms A was seated at the
front portion of the cabin and was busy using her laptop, with no idea
whatsoever that Ms. M was likewise onboard the ship.
by her anger towards Ms. A, Ms M stealthily approached the Australian from
behind and then quickly stabbed her neck with
pocketknife ,resulting in Ms. A’s immediate death. Operatives from the
Philippine National Police-Maritime Command arrested Ms. M for the killing of
Ms. A and thereafter , intented to charge her under the Revised Penal Code
(RPC). Ms M contented that the provisions of the RPC cannot be applied and
enforced against her because both she and the victim are not Filipino nationals
and besides, the alleged crime was committed in an Indonesian-registered
Is Ms. M’s contentions against the application of the RPC against her tenable
? Explain. (3%)
Assuming that the provisions of the RPC can be applied against Ms.M what crime
under the RPC should she charged with? Explain (2%)
In November 2018, Mr N, notorious criminal,was found guilty of three(3) counts of murder and was consequently sentenced with the penalty of reclusion perpetual for each count. A month after ,he was likewise found guilty of five (5)counts of Grave Threats in a separate criminal proceeding ,and hence,meted with the penalty of prison mayor for each count.
(a) What are the
respective durations of the penalties of
reclusion perpetua and prison mayor?(3%)
(b) How long will Mr. N
serve all his penalties of imprisonment? Explain.(2.5%)
(c) May Mr. N avail of
the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law with respect to his convictions
for Murder and Grave Threats? Explain. (3%)
Is Mr. N considered a habitual delinquent? Explain. (2.5%)
Mr. W was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Serious Physical Injuries, and accordingly, was sentences to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four (4) years, two (2) months and, (one (1) day of prison correccional, as maximum. He was also ordered to pay the victim actual damage in the amount of P50,000.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
Was the imposition of subsidiary imprisonment proper?
Mr. X and Mr. Y engaged in a violent fistfight which Mr. X instigated. This culminated in Mr. X left Mr Y barely breathing and almost dead. A few minutes after the incident, Mr. X immediately went to the police station to confess what he did and told the police where he left Mr. Y. Fortunately, the police rescued Mr. Y and he survived with the help of timely medical intervention. Mr. X was then charged in court with Frustrated Homicide, to which he openly confessed his guilt upon arraignment.
In June 2017, Mr. P was criminally charged with Qualified Theft under the Revised Penal Code. After due proceedings, the Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of six (6) years and one (1) day, as minimum, fourteen (14) years and one (1) day, of reclusion temporal, as maximum, Thereafter, Mr. P applied for probation.
E was charged with the complex crime of Estafa through Falsification of
Public Documents before the trial court. Prior to her arraignment, Ms. E moved
for the dismissal of the criminal case against her, pointing out that the
private offended party is her biological father, and that such relationship is
an absolutory cause under Article 332 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
One Sunday afternoon, Mr. X, President of ABC Corp., happened to bump into the Labor Arbiter assigned to the illegal dismissal case filed by certain employees against his company. During their encounter, Mr. X promised the Labor Arbiter a luxury car in exchange for a favorable ruling. The Labor Arbiter immediately the offer and walked away.
A typhoon destroyed the houses of many of the inhabitants of Municipality M. Accordingly, the local government passed an appropriation in the amount of P1,000,000.00 to implement a Calamity Assistance Program for the typhoon victims, and the funds therefore were eventually earmarked for the purpose. Upon the orders, however, of Mayor T of Municipality M, these funds were disbursed for the reconstruction of the municipal hall was a more pressing concern than the relief program because the vital functions of the local government would be impeded if the said structure would not be immediately fixed.
What crime did Mayor T commit under the Revised Penal
Code? Explain. (2%)
Ms. L, dean of a duly recognized private school, caught K, one of her students, vandalizing one of the school’s properties. Ms. L called K’s attention and proceeded to scold him causing a crowd to gather around them. Embarrassed with the situation, K attacked Ms. L by repeatedly punching her on the face. Just as K was about to strike Ms. L again, J another student, intervened. K then turned his anger on J and also hit him repeatedly, causing physical injuries.
What crime/s did K commit under the Revised Penal Code
for his act against Ms. L and J? Explain. (3%)
Mr. S, a businessman ad information technology practitioner, claimed to have devised an innovative business model. He would diligently compile a list of known personalities and entities in the fields of entertainment, arts, culture, and, sports, and acquire numerous domain names in the internet using the names of these known personalities and entities for the purpose of selling these registered domain to said personalities and entities in the future.
Does Mr. S’s “innovative business model” expose him to
any criminal liability under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012? If so, for
what crime? Explain. (2.5%)
-END OF PART II-
8 Ways to Get New Quality Clients for Ph CPA Practitioners
How to Record Foreign Currency Denominated Transactions in the Philippines?
Why Should You Withhold Taxes on Payments to Digital Freelancers in the Philippines?
Business Registration and Compliance: The Philippine Digital Freelancer’s Milestone to a Long-term Business
Tax Incentives of existing PEZA, BOI, etc. entities under RA 11534 CREATE Philippines
Vetoed Provisions of RA 11534 CREATE
RMC No. 29-2021: Adoption of e-Signature on Certain BIR Forms
Webinar: Input VAT Refund
2022 Tax and Accounting Online Conference
Webinar: Withholding Taxes, Subjects & Applications
Webinar on Corporate Entity Registration & Business Compliance: The start of a long-term business
Webinar: Winning BIR Tax Assessment and Preparing Effective Tax Protest
Live Webinar on Ph Payroll Computation and Taxation
Live Webinar: Value Added Tax: In and Out
Live Webinar: PEZA Registered Entities: Taxation and Basic Reports
Live Webinar: Basic Accounting & Tax Compliance for Digital Freelancers & Other Professionals Under 8% Tax Scheme
Phone : (02) 5310-2239
Mobile : Smart: 0921-343-2024
Email : info(@)taxacctgcenter.ph
© Tax and Accounting Center 2022. All Rights Reserved