Theory of absorption

In the light of the Hernandez doctrine the prosecution's theory must fail. The rationale remains the same. All crimes, whether punishable under a special law or general law, which are mere components or ingredients, or committed in furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and can not be isolated and charged as separate crimes in themselves. Thus:

This does not detract, however, from the rule that the ingredients of a crime form part and parcel thereof, and hence, are absorbed by the same and cannot be punished either separately therefrom or by the application of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. ... (People v. Hernandez, supra, at p. 528)

Doctrine of common elements

Forgery and falsification.

Forgeries include:

Article 169. How forgery is committed. - The forgery referred to in this section may be committed by any of the following means:

1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument, payable to bearer or order mentioned therein, the appearance of a true genuine document.

2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein.

*Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands or the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive. Article 161

*Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer; importing, and uttering such false or forged notes and documents. Article 166.

Obligations or security of the United States or of the Philippines Islands.

Document is a circulating note issued by any banking association duly authorized by law to issue the same.

Document was issued by a foreign government.

Document is a circulating note or bill issued by a foreign bank duly authorized therefor.

Article 163. Making and importing and uttering false coins. - Any person who makes, imports, or utters, false coins, in connivance with counterfeiters, or importers

silver coin of the Php or coin of the Central Bank of the Philippines of ten centavo denomination or above.

coins be any of the minor coinage of the Philippines or of the Central Bank of the Philippines below ten-centavo denomination.

coin be currency of a foreign country.

Article 165. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance- shall possess false or mutilated coin with intent to utter the same, or shall actually utter such coin.

Article 167. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer. - Any person who shall forge, import or utter, in connivance with the forgers or importers, any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer.

Article 168. Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit. - Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of the preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly use or have in his possession, with intent to use any of the false or falsified instruments referred to in this section, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in said articles.

Falsification

Article 171. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister. - The penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any public officer, employee, or notary who, taking advantage of his official position, shall falsify a document by committing any of the following acts:

1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;

2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate;

3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them;

4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

5. Altering true dates;

6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning;

7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or

8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book.

Article 172. Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents.

*Any public or official document or letter of exchange or any other kind of commercial document;

*Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in any private document commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article

*Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any judicial proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false documents embraced in the next preceding article.

Article 173. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages, and use of said falsified messages. –

*upon officer or employee of the Government or of any private corporation or concern engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or telephone message who utters a fictitious wireless, telegraph or telephone message of any system or falsifies the same. Any person who shall use such falsified dispatch to the prejudice of a third party or with the intent of cause such prejudice shall suffer penalty next lower in degree.

Article 174. False medical certificates, false certificates of merits or service, etc.

*Any physician or surgeon who, in connection, with the practice of his profession, shall issue a false certificate; and

*Any public officer who shall issue a false certificate of merit of service, good conduct or similar circumstances.

*Any private person who shall falsify a certificate falling within the classes mentioned in the two preceding subdivisions.

Article 175. Using false certificates.

*any one who shall knowingly use any of the false certificates mentioned in the next preceding article.

Article 176. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification

*any person who shall make or introduce into the Philippine Islands any stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or implements intended to be used in the commission of the offenses of counterfeiting or falsification mentioned in the preceding sections of this Chapter. Any person who, with the intention of using them, shall have in his possession any of the instruments or

implements mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that provided therein.

Kidnapping and serious illegal detention; Arbitrary detention;

Special complex crime/composite crime – when the person kidnapped is raped, killed or subjected to torture or dehuminizing acts(serious physical injuries). Only one information is filed. But not under art.48.Complex crimes.

Forcible abduction -- If a woman is transported from one place to another by virtue of restraining her of her liberty, and that act is coupled with lewd designs.

Serious illegal detention – If a woman is transported just to restrain her of her liberty. There is no lewd design or lewd intent.

Grave coercion – If a woman is carried away just to break her will, to compel her to agree to the demand or request by the offender.

Article 286. Grave coercions. - any person who, without authority of law, shall, by means of violence, prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law, or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong or If the coercion be committed for the purpose of compelling another to perform any religious act or to prevent him from so doing.

kidnapping may be committed by any private person, while in Arbitrary detention is committed only by public officer or ee who do not have any legal ground to detain a person. If the PO or EE is conniving with a PP for the purpose of ransom etc.., they may be considered as principals or accessory as the case may be. If the victim is killed or raped or dehumanized, special complex crime or Kidnapping and serious illegal detention with homicide or murder

Malversation & Fraud against public treasury

a.] The offender is a public officer;

b.] He has the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office;

c.] The funds or property involved are public funds or property for which he is accountable; and

d.] He has appropriated, taken or misappropriated, or has consented to, or through abandonment or negligence, permitted the taking by another person of, such funds or property.

Article 217. Malversation of public funds or property; Presumption of malversation. - Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same or shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds, or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property, shall suffer:

1. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount involved in the misappropriation or malversation does not exceed two hundred pesos.

2. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if the amount involved is more than two hundred pesos but does not exceed six thousand pesos.

3. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period, if the amount involved is more than six thousand pesos but is less than twelve thousand pesos.

4. The penalty of reclusion temporal, in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount involved is more than twelve thousand pesos but is less than twenty-two thousand pesos. If the amount exceeds the latter, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua.

In all cases, persons guilty of malversation shall also suffer the penalty of perpetual special disqualification and a fine equal to the amount of the funds malversed or equal to the total value of the property embezzled.

The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use. (As amended by RA 1060).

*In the crime of malversation, all that is necessary for conviction is proof that the accountable officer had received public funds and that he did not have them in his possession when demand was made. There is even no need of direct evidence of personal misappropriation as long as there is a shortage in his account and petitioner cannot satisfactorily explain the same.

Ariola v. Sandiganbayan

Confiscated materials placed under his custody(bgy. Chairman). Although his duty does not include keeping the materials, he is nonetheless liable for malversation because the materials were entrusted to him for safekeeping or as custodian.

People v. Pantaloon

Complex crime Malversation of public funds through falsification of public docs.

Tello v. Sandiganbayan

As Telegraph Operator and Telegraphic Transfer-in-Charge, petitioner was in charge of the collections which he was supposed to remit to the PNB. The funds are public funds for which petitioner was accountable. It was also established that petitioner misappropriated the money. He failed to remit his cash collections and falsified the entries in the cashbooks to make it appear that he remitted the money to PNB. Petitioner failed to explain the discrepancies and shortage in his accounts and he failed to restitute the missing amount upon demand. It was also established that petitioner stopped reporting to work starting 8 December 1986. The last paragraph of Article 217 of the RPC states: "The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal uses."In this case, petitioner failed to rebut the presumption of malversation. He did not present testimonial evidence to defend himself.

Techinical Malversation

Ombudsman v. Apolonio

Circulars issued by Central bank are not a law or an ordinance.

Abdulla v. People

Presumption of criminal intent does not apply in technical Malversation because disbursement of public fund for public use is not per se an unlawful act.

This calls to mind the oft-repeated maxim `Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea,’ which expounds a basic principle in criminal law that a

crime is not committed if the mind of the person performing the act complained of be innocent. Thus, to constitute a crime, the act must, except in certain crimes made such by statute, be accompanied by a criminal intent. It is true that a presumption of criminal intent may arise from proof of the commission of a criminal act; and the general rule is that if it is proved that the accused committed the criminal act charged, it will be presumed that the act was done with criminal intention and that it is for the accused to rebut this presumption. But it must be borne in mind that the act from which such presumption springs must be a criminal act In the case at bar, the act is not criminal. Neither can it be categorized as malum prohibitum, the mere commission of which makes the doer criminally liable even if he acted without evil intent.

Article 213. Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses. - The penalty of prision correccional in its medium period to prision mayor in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 10,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any public officer who:

1. In his official capacity, in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds, shall enter into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or make use of any other scheme, to defraud the Government;

2. Being entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts, shall be guilty or any of the following acts or omissions:

(a) Demanding, directly, or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law.

(b) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially.

(c) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise things or objects of a nature different from that provided by law.

When the culprit is an officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau of Customs, the provisions of the Administrative Code shall be applied.