Bottom of Form

Criminal Law II Reviewer

Vena V. Verga
pertains to the official duty of the officer
2.In bribery, the offender refrained from doing his official
duty in consideration of a gift received or promised; while
in crime of prevaricacion this element is NOT necessary

Third Element:

1.The act which the public officer agrees to perform must be connected with the
performance of official duties

3.The fact that the act agreed to be performed is in excess of his power, jurisdiction, or
authority is no defense,
EXCEPT: if act is so foreign to duties of office as to lack even color of authority

4.In bribery, the gift or present must be given

to the public officer to corrupt him 211

Indirect Bribery
1.That the offender is a public officer
2.That he accepts gifts
3.That the said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office

Direct Bribery Distinguished from Indirect Bribery:

1.In both, the public officer receives a gift

2.In direct bribery, there is an agreement between the public officer and the giver;
in indirect bribery, usually, no such agreement exists

3.In direct bribery, the offender agrees to perform or performs an act or refrains
from doing something, because of the gift or promise; in indirect bribery, in is NOT
necessary that the officer should do any particular act or even promise to do any
act, as it is enough that he accepts gifts offered to him by reason of his office
A Mayor,
suspension in
minimum and
medium and
public censure
 No attempted or
frustrated
indirect bribery
1.The gift is usually given to the public officerin anticipation of future favor from the
publicofficer
2.There must be a clear intention on the partof the public officer to take the gift
sooffered and consider the same as his ownproperty
3.Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by anyother sign, circumstance or act to show
suchacceptance is NOT sufficient to lead the courtto conclude that the crime of
indirect briberyhas been committed
4.People vs. Pamplona (pg. 361) – consideredindirect bribery even if there was a sort
ofagreement between public officer and giver;reason:the act executed by the
accusedwas NOT unjust, therefore it cannot be directbribery
211-A
Qualified
Bribery
1.That the offender is a public officer or entrusted with law
enforcement
2.That the offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting an
offender who has committed a crime punishable by RP
and/or death
3.That the offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting
the offender in consideration of any promise, gift or
present
Penalty for
offense which
was not
prosecuted –
first paragraph
Penalty of death
– if it is the
public officer
who asks or
demands such
gift or present
/vvverga Second Semester, AY 2004-2005
Page 35 of 75
Criminal Law II Reviewer
 Criminal Law II Reviewer
Vena V. Verga
212
Corruption of
Public
Officials
1.That the offender offers or promises or gives gifts or
presents to a public officer
2.That the offers or promises are made or the gifts or
presents given to a public officer, under circumstances that
will make the public officer liable for direct bribery or
indirect bribery
 Same penalties
imposed upon
officer corrupted
except
disqualification
and suspension
1.Offender in this article is the giver or offeror
2.The public officer sought to be bribed, is notcriminally liable, unless he accepts the gift
orconsents
3.Bribery is usually proved by evidence
acquired in entrapment
213
Frauds
Against the
Public
Treasury and
Similar
Offenses
Acts Punishable as Frauds Against Public Treasury:
1.By entering into any agreement with any interested party
or speculator or making use of any other scheme, to
defraud the government, in dealing with any person with
regard to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or
the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to
property or funds.
2.By demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of sumsdifferent form or larger than
those authorized y law, in thecollection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts.
3.By failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law,
for any sum of money collected by him officially, in the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts
4.By collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of
payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law, in the collection of
taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts
Elements of Frauds against Public Treasury:
1.That the offender be public officer
2.That he should have taken advantage of his office, that is,
he intervened in the transaction in his official capacity
3.That he entered into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or made use of any other scheme with
regard to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or
the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public
property or funds
4.That the accused had intent to defraud the government
Elements of Illegal Exaction:
1.The offender is a public officer entrusted with the
 collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts
2.He is guilty of acts 2, 3 and 4 (above in Acts Punishable as
Frauds Against Public Treasury)
PC medium to
PM minimum, or
a fine ranging
from P200 to
P10,000, or both
Provisions of
Administrative
Code – when
culprit is an
officer or
employee of BIR
or BOC
1.Public officer must act in his official capacity– the public officer must have the duty
todeal with any person with regard tofurnishing supplies, etc.
2.The crime of frauds against public treasury isconsummated by merely entering into
anagreement with any interested party orspeculator or by merely making use of
anyother scheme to defraud the government
3.It is not necessary that the government isactually defrauded by reason of
thetransaction.
4. It is sufficient that the government isactually defrauded by reason of thetransaction.
5.Mere demand for larger or different amount
is sufficient to consummate the crime
6.Collecting officer must issue official receipts
to be guilty of illegal exactions
7.When there is DECEIT in demanding greaterfees than those prescribed by law, the
crimecommitted is estafa and not illegal exaction.
8. Tax collector need not account for tax
collected
9.If a tax collector collected a sum larger thanthat authorized by law and spent all of
themis guilty of 2 crimes;
a.Illegal exaction, for demanding a greater
amount
b.Malversation, for misappropriating the
amount extracted
10.Officer or employee of BIR or BOC not
covered by this article
214
Other Frauds
Elements of the Crime:
1.That the offender is a public officer
2.That he takes advantage of his official position
In addition to the
penalties
prescribed in the
1.The public officer must take advantage of his
official position
2.Frauds and Deceits Enumerated in Chapter
/vvverga Second Semester, AY 2004-2005
Page 36 of 75
Criminal Law II Reviewer

Criminal Law II Reviewer

Vena V. Verga
3.That he commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated
in Articles 315 to 318
provisions of
Chapter 6, Title
10, Book 2 of
 this Code, the
penalty of TSD in
maximum to PSD
6, Title 10, Book 2 of this Code:
a. Estafa
b.Other Forms of Swindling
c.Swindling a Minor
d. Other Deceits
3.The RTC, and not the MTC, has jurisdiction
when this article is involved, regardless of
amount or penalty involved because the MTC
has not jurisdiction to impose the penalty of
disqualification
215
Prohibited
Transactions
1.That the offender is an appointive public officer
2.That he becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any
transaction of exchange or speculation
3.That the transaction takes place within the territory
subject to his jurisdiction
4.That he becomes interested in the transaction during his
incumbency
Example of Appointive Public Officer:
- justices, judges or fiscals, employees engaged in the
collection and administration of public funds
PC minimum or a
fine ranging from
P200 to P1,000,
or both
1.The transaction must be one of exchange or
speculation
2.It is sufficient that the appointive officer hasan interest in any transaction of exchange
orspeculation
3.Purchasing of stocks or shares in a companyis simply an investment and is not a
violationof the article
4.Buying regularly securities for resale is
speculation
5.Appointive officer should not devote himself
to commerce
216
Possession of
Prohibited
Interest by a
Public Officer
People Liable for Possession of Prohibited Interest:
1.Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became interestedin any contract or business
in which it was his official dutyto intervene.
2.Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in like
manner, took part in any contract or transaction connected
with the estate or property in the appraisal, distribution or
adjudication of which they had acted
3.Guardians and executors with respect to the property
belonging to their wards or estate
A Mayor medium
period to PC
minimum period,
or a fine ranging
from P200 to
P1,000, or both
1.Actual fraud is not necessary
2.Intervention must be by virtue of public
office held
3.An officer who intervenes in contract or
transaction which has no connection with his
office CANNOT commit the crime defined in
Article 218
217
Malversation
of Public
Funds or
Property –
Presumption
of
Malversation
Embezzlement – also called malversation
Acts Punishable in Malversation:
1.By appropriating public funds or property
-
includes every attempt to dispose of the same without
right
2.By taking or misappropriating the same
-
the funds or property taken need not be
misappropriated for it to be consummated
3.By consenting, or thru abandonment or negligence,
permitting any other person to take such public funds or
PC in medium
and maximum –
if amount does
not exceed P200
 PM minimum and
medium – if
amount is more
than P200 by not
exceeding
P6,000
1.The offender in malversation under this
article must be a public officer defined in
Article 203
2.Nature of the duties of the public officer, not
name of office, is controlling
3.Funds or property must be received in
official capacity
4.When a public officer had no authority to
receive the money for the government and
upon receipt if the same he misappropriated
it, the crime committed is estafa
/vvverga Second Semester, AY 2004-2005
Page 37 of 75
Criminal Law II Reviewer
Criminal Law II Reviewer
Vena V. Verga
property
-
negligence must be positive and clearly shown to be
inexcusable, approximating malice or fraud
4.By being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property
Elements Common to All Acts of Malversation:
1.That the offender be a public officer
2.That he had the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office
3.That those funds or property were public funds or property
for which he was accountable
4.That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented
or, thru abandonment or negligence, permitted another
person to take them
To be guilty of Malversation, Public officer must have:
1.The official custody of public funds or property or the duty
to collect or receive funds due the government, and
2.The obligation to account for them to the government
PM maximum to
RT minimum, if
amount more
than P6,000 but
less than
P12,000
RT medium and
maximum, if
amount more
than P12,000 but
less than
P22,000
RT maximum to
RP if amount
exceeds P22,000
5.A public officer having only a qualified
charge of government property without
authority to part with physical possession of
it unless upon order from his immediate
superior, cannot be held liable for
malversation (Webster and Wickersham
rulings)
6.Webster and Wickersham cases not
applicable when the accused had authority to
receive money pertaining to the government
7.A private person conspiring with an
accountable public officer in committing
malversation is also guilty of malversation
8.Government funds include revenue funds
and trust funds
9.Private property may be involved in
malversation
10. The measure of negligence is the standard of
care commensurate with the occasion
11. In malversation not committed thru
negligence, lack of criminal intent or good
faith is a defense
12. Presumption from failure to have duly
forthcoming public funds or property upon
 demand: Prima Facie evidence that he has
put such to personal use
13. Presumption may be rebutted
14. The return of the funds is only mitigation,
not exempting circumstance
15. When a shortage is paid by the public officer
from his pocket, he is not liable for
malversation
16. Borrowing money to replace funds –
malversation
17. Borrowing money to replace funds – when
missing amount is found in some
unaccustomed place, he is NOT liable
18. Previous demand is not necessary in
malversation in spite of last paragraph of
Article 217
19. A person whose negligence made possible
the commission of malversation by another
can be held liable as principle by
/vvverga Second Semester, AY 2004-2005
Page 38 of 75
Criminal Law II Reviewer

Upload a Document
Top of Form

Search Documents
Bottom of Form
• Follow Us!
• scribd.com/scribd
• twitter.com/scribd
• facebook.com/scribd
• About
• Press
• Blog
• Partners
• Scribd 101
• Web Stuff
• Scribd Store
• Support
• FAQ
• Developers / API
• Jobs
• Terms
• Copyright
• Privacy
Copyright © 2011 Scribd Inc.
Language:
English