J. Title X – Crimes Against Property

I. Title Ten - Crimes against Property (Articles 293-332)

• Anti-Fencing Law of 1979 – P.D. No. 1612, secs. 2 and 5-6
• Bouncing Checks Law – B.P. Blg. 22, secs. 1-3 and 5; A.C. No. 12-2000; A.C. No. 13-2001
• New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016 – R.A. No. 10883, secs. 2(e), 3 and 4
• Motorcycle Crime Prevention Act – R.A. No. 11235, secs. 4 and 7 (as amended by R.A. No. 12209), 9 and 11- 13 (as amended by R.A. No. 12209)
• Law on Arson – P.D. No. 1613, secs. 1-7

Crimes Against Property (Articles 293-332)

Updated: Sections 4, 7, and 11–13 of the Motorcycle Crime Prevention Act were amended by R.A. No. 12209, approved 9 May 2025.

Chapter 1: Robbery in General

Robbery is the taking of personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by means of violence against, or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.

Taking, as an element of robbery, means unlawfully acquiring possession or control of another’s personal property, with intent to gain; it does not require depriving the owner of title. The taking should not be under a claim of ownership. Thus, one who takes the property openly and avowedly under claim of title offered in good faith is not guilty of robbery even though the claim of ownership is untenable. (Sy v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 171579)

Article 293. Who Are Guilty Of Robbery

Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything

---

Distinctions between effects of employment of Violence or Intimidation and Use of Force upon things

Notes:

• Unlawful taking is complete when:
• With violence/intimidation: property must at least be in the possession of the offender; and
• With force: property must be taken out of the building (REYES, BOOK TWO, p. 684, citing People v, Del Rosario, C.A. 46. O.G. 4332)
• Intent to gain is presumed from unlawful taking and must concur with “personal property belonging to another”.
• When violence/intimidation must take place:
• General Rule: before taking is complete;
• Exception: when violence results in (1) homicide, (2) rape, (3) intentional mutilation, or (4) any of the serious physical injuries under Art. 263, par. 1 and 2; Robbery will be deemed specially complexed with any of those crimes, even if the taking was already complete when the violence was used by the offender.
• The taking need not immediately precede the intimidation.
• Prohibited articles may be the subject matter of robbery.

Section 1 – Robbery with Violence against or Intimidation of Persons

Art 294. Robbery with Violence against or Intimidation of Persons

Punishable Acts:

• By reason or on occasion of the robbery, homicide is committed;
• Rape or intentional mutilation accompanies the commission of robbery;
• By reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency, or blindness is inflicted (Art. 263, par. 1); or serious physical injuries resulting in the loss of the use of speech, or the power to hear or to smell, or the loss of an eye, hand, foot, arm, leg, or the loss of the use of any such member or incapacity for work in which victim is habitually engaged is inflicted by the robber on someone (Art. 263, par. 2);
• If the violence or intimidation which accompanies the robbery is carried out to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime;
• In the course of executing the robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting to deformity, loss of any part of the body or the use thereof, or illness or incapacity for the performance of the work habitually engaged in for > 90 days or becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for > 30 days (Art. 263, para. 3 and 4) is inflicted by the robber on someone; or
• The offender does not, during the robbery, cause any serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs only intimidation.

Elements:

Art. 293. Robbery

Elements:

• The offender takes personal property belonging to another;
• The taking is with intent to gain; and
• The taking is by means of violence against or intimidation of any person, or by using force upon anything.

Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons

Notes:

• It important to determine the primary objective or intent of the accused.
• Having the intent to gain from taking personal property of another must precede the rape.
• Rape is committed on the occasion of the robbery, even if committed in another place within the house.
• When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of robbery, rape is considered as an aggravating circumstance only to Robbery with Homicide.
• There is no complex crime of Robbery with Attempted Rape.
• Additional rapes committed on the same occasion of robbery will not increase the penalty.
• For the crime of Robbery with Rape, the law does not distinguish whether the rape was committed before, during, or after the robbery, but only that it punishes robbery that was accompanied by rape.

Paragraph 4: Robbery with Unnecessary Violence and Intimidation

• There are two situations comprehended:
• When the violence or intimidation is carried out to a degree clearly unnecessary to accomplish the robbery, or
• When physical injuries covered by sub. 3 and 4 of Art. 263 were inflicted upon any person not responsible for the commission of robbery
• Violence or intimidation in the first situation need not be present before or at the exact moment when the object is taken.
• The violence or intimidation may be committed at any time before the owner is finally deprived of his property.

Paragraph 5: Robbery with Violence or Intimidation in Other Cases

• Acts done, either by their own nature or by reason of the circumstances under which they are executed, must inspire fear in the person against whom they are directed.
• It must be objective fright (due to some act on the part of the accused), and not subjective fright (fear arising from the mere temperamental timidity of the offended party) ), which is produced.

Robbery through Intimidation and Threats to extort money, Distinguished

Robbery with Violence and Grave Coercion, Distinguished

Robbery and Bribery, Distinguished

Art. 295. Robbery with Physical Injuries, Committed in an Uninhabited Place and by a Band, or with the Use of Firearm on a Street, Road or Alley (Qualified Robbery)

Two (2) instances:

• Robbery which occurs in:
• An inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship (Art. 299), or
• An uninhabited building or a private building (Art. 302); and
• If the offender did not enter the premises through any of the means mentioned in Art. 299(a) but broke a wardrobe, chest, or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle in the house or building, or he took it away to be broken or forced open outside, and took contents thereof.

Art 299. Robbery in an Inhabited House or Public Building or Edifice Devoted To Worship

Any armed person who shall commit robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship

---

Article 299, subdivision (a) elements:

• That the offender entered
• an inhabited house, or
• public building, or
• edifice devoted to religious worship;
• That the entrance was effected by any of the following means:
• Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress;
• By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or window;
• By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools; or
• By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority; and
• That once inside the building, the offender took personal property belonging to another with intent to gain

Notes:

• There must be intention to take personal property in entering the building.
• The offender must wholly enter the building in which the robbery was committed (i.e., whole body of the culprit must be inside the building).
• False keys are genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock forcibly opened by the offender (Art. 305).
• Picklock or similar tools are those implements specially adopted to the commission of robbery (Art. 304).
• When a false key is used to open a wardrobe or locked receptacle or drawer or inside door and not to open the house/building/edifice, it is only theft.
• Using of fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority must be the efficient cause of the opening by the offended party of the door of his house to the accused.
• The four means of entrance must be resorted to by the offender to enter. The means used to get out are immaterial to determining whether a violation of Art. 299(a) was committed.

Art. 299, subdivision (b) elements:

• That the offender is inside a dwelling house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship, regardless of the circumstances under which he entered it; and
• That the offender takes personal property belonging to another with intent to gain, under any of the following circumstances:
• by the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle, or
• by taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the place of the robbery

Notes:

• While the offender should have necessarily entered the house/building/edifice, such entrance need not have been by any of the means mentioned in Art. 299, subdivision (a).
• “Doors” refer only to “doors, lids, or opening sheets” of furniture or other portable receptacles – not to inside doors of a house or building.
• When a sealed box is taken out for the purpose of breaking it, the crime is already consummated robbery. There is no need to actually open it inside the building from where it was taken.
• If the accused was entrusted only with custody of the box and unlawfully took the money contained therein, the crime may be theft (Art. 308). Estafa by misappropriation requires receipt of juridical possession of the money or property misappropriated (Art. 315(1)(b)).
• If the box was found outside of the building and the accused forced it open, the crime is theft.

Art 300. Robbery in an Uninhabited Place and by a Band

The robbery mentioned in Article 299, if committed in an uninhabited place and by a band

---

Notes:

• The penalty in Article 299 will be in the maximum period, if robbery with force upon things is committed in an uninhabited place and by a band.
• The inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to religious worship must be located in an uninhabited place, as opposed to robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, which must be committed in an uninhabited place or by a band.

Art 301. What Is an Inhabited House, Public Building, or Building Dedicated To Religious Worship and Their Dependencies

Notes:

• Place is still considered inhabited even if the occupant is absent when robbery occurred
• Orchard and other lands for cultivation or production are not included in the term dependencies (Art 301, par. 3).

Art. 302. Robbery in an Uninhabited Place or in a Private Building

Elements:

• That the offender entered an uninhabited place or a building which is not a dwelling house, not a public building, or not an edifice devoted to religious worship;
• That with intent to gain, the offender took therefrom personal property belonging to another;
• That any of the following circumstances was present:
• Entrance was effected through an opening not intended for entrance or egress;
• A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window was broken;
• The entrance was effected through the use of false keys, picklocks or other similar tools;
• A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or closed furniture or receptacle was broken; or
• A closed or sealed receptacle was removed, even if the same be broken open elsewhere

Not applicable:

• Where the entrance is for the purpose of preventing harm to himself, the occupants or a third person
• Where the purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice
• When the accused entered the dwelling through the window, he had no intent to kill any person inside. His intention to kill came to his mind when he was being arrested by the occupants thereof. Hence, the crime of trespass to dwelling is a separate and distinct offense from frustrated homicide.
• Where a person enters establishments which cater to/serve the public while still open for such patronage.
• If a public officer or an authorized person is conducting a valid arrest or a valid search and seizure. (Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 113)

Art. 281. Other Forms of Trespass

Any person who shall enter the closed premises or the fenced estate of another, while either or both of them are uninhabited, if the prohibition to enter be manifest and the trespasser has not secured the permission of the owner or the caretaker thereof

---

Other Forms of Trespass and Qualified Trespass to Dwelling, Distinguished

Chapter 3: Theft

Art. 308. Who are Liable for Theft

Theft is the taking, with intent to gain, of personal property belonging to another without the latter’s consent and without violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things.

---

Meaning of misappropriate or convert

The words “misappropriate” and “convert” connote an act of using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s own or of devoting it to a purpose or use different from that agreed upon. (CenizaManatan v People, GR No. 156248)

Elements:

• That there be taking of personal property;
• That such property belongs to another;
• That the taking be done with intent to gain;
• That the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and
• That the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things.

Persons liable:

• Those who:
• with intent to gain,
• but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things,
• take personal property of another,
• without the latter’s consent.
• Those who:
• having found lost property,
• fail to deliver the same to the local authorities or its owner.

(Retention of money/property found is theft. What is punished is retention or failure to return with intent to gain. The offender’s knowledge of the identity of the owner of the property is not required. His knowledge that the property is lost is enough.)

• Those who:
• after having maliciously damaged the property of another,
• remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by them.

(Killing the cattle of another which destroyed his [offender’s] property and getting meat for himself is theft.)

• Those who
• enter an enclosed estate or a field,
• where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another, and
• without the consent of its owner, hunt or fish there, or gather fruits, cereals or other forest or farm products therefrom.

(Fishing should not be in a fishpond or fishery within the field or estate; otherwise, it is qualified theft under Art. 310.)

Notes:

• Taking is consummated the moment the offender has full possession of the thing even if he did not have an opportunity to dispose of the same; it does not require “taking away or carrying away.”
• The “taking” must be accompanied by the intention, at the time of the taking, of withholding the thing with character of permanency. (People v. Rico, et al. C.A., 50 O.G. 3103; Peple v. Galang, et al. C.A., 43 O.G. 577)
• Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking, except if the person takes the thing from another believing in good faith that it is his own.
• Actual or real gain is not necessary; it is enough that on taking the property, the accused was actuated by the desire or intent to gain.
• The existence of the DARAB Decision adjudicating the issue of tenancy between the offended party and the offender negates the existence of the element that the taking was done without the owner's consent. The DARAB Decision implies that the offender had legitimate authority to harvest the abaca. (Ligtas v. People, G.R. No. 200751)
• Consent (of owner) contemplated in the element of theft refers to consent freely given and not merely implied from silence of the owner.
• Allegation in the information of lack of consent is indispensable.
• In theft of lost property, it is necessary to prove:
• Time of the seizure of the things;
• That it was lost property belonging to another; and
• That the accused, having had the opportunity to return or deliver the lost property to its owner or to the local authorities, refrained from doing so.
• Unless force upon things is used to enter a building, it is theft and not robbery, except that it is robbery when a furniture, chest, or other locked/sealed receptacle is broken in the house or building or taken therefrom and broken outside (which means the offender was able to enter the house or building though he did not use force to enter).
• Unexplained possession of recently stolen property may support an inference that the possessor stole the property possessed; liability for other property stolen in the incident requires supporting evidence. (Revised Rules on Evidence, Rule 131, Sec. 3(j), as amended in 2019.)
• Theft is NOT a continuing offense.
• There is no frustrated theft.

Theft and Estafa, Distinguished

Art 309. Penalties

Basis for penalty:

• The value of the thing stolen;
• The value and the nature of the thing taken; or
• The circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime

Art 310. Qualified Theft

Acts of theft committed:

• By a domestic servant, or
• With grave abuse of confidence, or
• The property stolen is a:
• Motor vehicle (Art. 310 retains this wording, but unlawful taking of a motor vehicle as defined in RA 10883 is prosecuted as carnapping under Secs. 3–4 of that special law),
• Mail matter,
• Large cattle,
• Coconut taken from the premises of a plantation (whether still in the tree or deposited on the ground),
• Fish from a fishpond or fishery; or
• On the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance

---

Elements:

• Taking of personal property;
• Said property belongs to another;
• Said taking is done with intent to gain;
• It is done without the owner’s consent;
• It is accomplished without the use of violence or intimidation against persons, nor of force upon things; and
• It is done under any of the qualifying circumstances.

Notes:

• Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term “administrator”
• Judicial administrator (appointed to administer estate of deceased and not in charge of property attached, impounded or placed in deposit by public authority) not covered by this article
• Private property is included if it is attached, seized or deposited by public authority

Notes:

• “Grave abuse of confidence” necessitates a high degree of confidence between the offender and the offended party. (ex. guests); the information must allege grave abuse of confidence, and the prosecution must prove a relation by reason of dependence, guardianship or vigilance, between the accused and the offended party, that has created a high degree of confidence between them, and the abuse of that confidence.
• In a case where the domestic helper received a call from a stranger to bring the valuable items of her employer because the latter was involved in an accident, and they later found out that this was not true, the Court found the helper guilty of qualified theft because it was clear that it was she who took the valuables and the fact that she did not pause to evaluate the situation despite warnings by co-workers and security personnel, was contrary to human experience. (People v. Mejares, G.R. 225735)
• Theft may be qualified by grave abuse of confidence when the offender exploits a high degree of trust reposed in them; mere access to the place where stolen property is kept is insufficient. (Revised Penal Code, Art. 310)
• A bank’s employees are entrusted with the possession of money of the bank due to the confidence reposed in them and as such they occupy positions of confidence. In PNB v. Tria, the Court found a prima facie basis to proceed with prosecution concerning the manager’s checks; it did not adjudge the bank officer guilty of qualified theft. (PNB v. Tria, G.R. No. 193250)
• Theft by a laborer is only simple theft; not all theft by a housemate is qualified theft.
• Theft by a domestic servant is always qualified.
• PD 705: Any person who directly or indirectly cuts, gathers, removes, or smuggles timber, or other forest products from any of the public forest is penalized with Qualified Theft.

Chapter 4: Usurpation

Art. 312. Occupation of Real Property or Usurpation of Real Rights in Property

Any person who, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, shall take possession of any real property or shall usurp any real rights in property belonging to another.

---

Elements:

• That the offender takes possession of any real property, or usurps any real rights in property;
• That the real property or real rights belong to another;
• That violence against or intimidation of persons is used by the offender in occupying real property or usurpation of real rights in property; and
• That there is intent to gain.

Usurpation and Theft or Robbery, Distinguished

Notes:

• That there be boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks intended to designate the boundaries of the same; and
• That the offender alters those boundary marks or monuments.

Notes:

• Intent to gain or fraudulent intent is not necessary; mere alteration is sufficient
• “Alter” has a general and indefinite meaning: to make something different without changing it into something else.

Chapter 5: Culpable Insolvency

Art. 314. Fraudulent Insolvency

Any person who shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors

---

Elements:

• Offender is a Debtor, that is, he has obligations due and payable;
• Offender Absconds with his property; and
• That there be Prejudice to his creditors.

When offender, in the first mode, is a private individual

If the offender who enters another's dwelling against the will of its lawful occupant is a private individual, the crime committed is Trespass to Dwelling.

Refusal to leave

Under the 3rd mode, even if the entrance is only without the consent of its owner, the crime is committed when there is a refusal to leave the premises when required to do so.

Notes

• When there is no agreement as to the quality of the thing to be delivered, the delivery of the thing in a state not acceptable to the complainant is not estafa.
• Crime may arise even though the obligation is based on an immoral or illegal consideration.

Elements of Misappropriation or Conversion

• Money, goods, or other personal property are 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;
• Such money or property is misappropriated by the offender, or is denied being received by him;
• Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another.

Demand and failure to account for or return the property may be evidence of misappropriation, but demand is not an indispensable element of estafa under Article 315(1)(b) of the Revised Penal Code.

Notes:

• Juridical possession (right of possession which may be set up against its owner) is transferred.
• Transfer of juridical possession is distinct from (a) transfer of material possession which results in theft, or (b) transfer of ownership which generally precludes estafa by misappropriation under Article 315(1)(b), but may constitute estafa by means of deceit under Article 315(2)(a) if induced by prior or simultaneous deceit.
• It is presumed that the possession of, and title to, the thing delivered remains in the owner, when the delivery of a chattel has not the effect of transferring the juridical possession thereof, or title thereto.
• Includes quasi-contracts and certain contracts of bailment (deposit, lease, commodatum, but not mutuum [loan of money])
• Criminal liability for estafa is not affected by subsequent novation of contract after estafa has already been consummated or incurred, or after a criminal information/ complaint has already been filed.
• There is no estafa through negligence.

Test to distinguish Estafa from Theft:

• Whether the accused received juridical possession or only material custody of the thing delivered to him (Revised Penal Code, Arts. 308 and 315(1)(b)):
• if only material custody was transferred, its appropriation may be theft;
• if juridical possession was transferred, its appropriation may be estafa; EXCEPTION: where the offender is a servant, domestic, or employee in whom custody of the thing delivered is only precarious and for a temporary purpose or for a short period, hence, juridical or constructive possession remains with the owner (Constructive possession is when the owner still has, under his control and management and subject to his disposition, the thing even if actual physical possession is already transferred).

Elements of Taking Undue Advantage of the Signature of the Offended Party in Blank

• The paper with the signature of the offended party is blank;
• The offended party should have delivered it to offender;
• Above the signature of the offended party in the otherwise blank paper, a document is written by the offender without authority to do so; and
• The document so written creates a liability of, or causes damage to, the offended party or any third person.

Note: If the blank paper with the offended party’s signature was stolen, the crime is falsification if the offender made it appear that the victim participated in a transaction, when in fact he did not so participate therein.

Second way of committing Estafa (By Means of Deceit)

Elements, in General:

• There must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means;
• Such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud;
• The offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his money or property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means; and
• As a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage

Acts Punishable:

• By using fictitious name, or by falsely pretending to possess (a) power, (b) influence, (c) qualifications, (d) property, (e) credit, (f) agency, (g) business, or (h) imaginary transactions, or by means of other similar deceits
• It is indispensable that the element of deceit (i.e., the false statement or fraudulent representation) be made prior to, or at least simultaneously with, the delivery of the thing, such that the deceit used constitutes the very cause or the only motive which induces the complainant to part with the thing

Note: A Ponzi scheme may constitute estafa under paragraph 2(a) of Art. 315; it is syndicated estafa under PD 1689 only if that decree’s additional requirements are proved, including commission by a syndicate of five or more persons and the statutory circumstances concerning the funds solicited. It is a type of investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors. Its organizers often solicit new investors by promising to invest funds in opportunities claimed to generate high returns with little or no risk.

• By altering the quality, fineness, or weight of anything pertaining to the offender’s art or business
• By pretending to have bribed any Government employee, without prejudice to the action for calumny which the offended party may deem proper to bring against the offender
• By postdating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an obligation when the offender had no funds in the bank, or his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check
• Prima facie evidence of deceit: failure to deposit the amount necessary to cover check within three (3) days from receipt of notice from bank of dishonor for insufficiency of funds
• The check issued must be genuine, and not falsified; otherwise, it is estafa by means of false pretense or through falsification.
• The obligation covered by the check must be contracted at the time of the issuance and delivery of the check; otherwise (i.e., if for a pre-exisiting obligation), there is no estafa.
• The accused must be able to obtain something from the offended party by means of the check – damage done to the offended party.
• There is no estafa if the postdated checks are issued and intended merely as a security.
• The payee should not have been informed by the offender and the payee should not have known that the offender had no funds or insufficient funds. (Andan v People, GR No 136388)

Estafa and Bouncing Checks Law (B.P. 22), Distinguished

• By any of the following acts committed at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging house, or apartment house
• By obtaining food, refreshment or accommodation therein without paying therefor, with intent to defraud the proprietor or manager thereof;
• By obtaining credit therein by the use of any false pretense; and
• By abandoning or surreptitiously removing any part of his baggage from therein after obtaining credit, food, refreshment, or accommodation therein, without paying therefor

Third way of committing Estafa (By Fraudulent Means)

By conveying, selling, encumbering, or mortgaging any real property, pretending to be the owner of the same

Elements

• That the thing be Immovable, such as a parcel of land or a building;
• That the offender, who is Not the owner of said property, represented that he is the owner thereof;
• That the offender should have Executed an act of ownership (conveying, selling, encumbering, or mortgaging the real property); and
• That the act be made to the Prejudice of the owner or a third person

Note:

Claim of ownership is different from pretense of ownership: a good faith claimant of ownership cannot be considered a mere pretender of ownership, even if his claim is defective; hence, the claimant is not liable under the article.

First act under other forms of swindling (Art. 316, para. 1) and Estafa by falsely pretending to possess property (Art. 315, para. 2(a)), Distinguished

By disposing of real property as free from encumbrance, although such encumbrance be not recorded

Elements

• That the thing disposed of be Real property;
• That the offender knew that the real property was Encumbered, whether the encumbrance is recorded or not;
• That there must be express representation by the offender that the real property is Free from encumbrance; and
• That the act of disposing of the real property be made to the Damage of another

Notes:

• The encumbrance must be legally constituted, notwithstanding the provision “although such encumbrance be not recorded”.
• The encumbrance includes every right or interest in the land which exists in favor of third persons
• The offended party must have been deceived, i.e., he would not have granted the loan had he known that the property was already encumbered.
• If personal property is involved, apply Art. 319.

By the owner wrongfully taking his personal property from its lawful possessor

Elements:

• The offender owns personal property in the lawful possession of another;
• The offender wrongfully takes the property from that possessor; and
• The taking prejudices the possessor or a third person.

Notes:

• The act is punishable as theft when the owner of a property took it without the consent of the lawful possessor, then charged the possessor with the value of the property, because there is intent to gain.
• “Wrongful taking” does not include violence:
• With intent to gain – as this is robbery; or
• Without intent to gain – as this is grave coercion.

Estafa by executing fictitious contract (Art. 316, para. 4) and Fraudulent Insolvency, (Art. 314) Distinguished

Notes:

• This crime requires fraud; otherwise, solutio indebiti results for which only a civil obligation arises.
• If money in payment of a debt is delivered to the wrong person by mistake, refusal or failure to return it does not by itself constitute estafa under Art. 315, 1(b), which requires receipt in trust, on commission, for administration, or under another obligation to deliver or return it. The obligation to return the money may instead be civil under Civil Code, Art. 2154; assess whether the elements of another offense, such as theft, are present.

By selling or mortgaging or encumbering real property or properties with which the offender guaranteed the fulfillment of his obligation as surety

Elements:

• That the offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action;
• That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation with his real property or properties;
• That he sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner, encumbers said real property;
• That such sale, mortgage or encumbrance is
• without express authority from the court, or
• made before the cancellation of his bond, or
• made before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him

Art. 317. Swindling a Minor

Any person who, taking advantage of the inexperience or emotions or feelings of a minor, to his detriment, shall induce him to assume any obligation or to give any release or execute a transfer of any property right in consideration of some loan of money, credit or other personal property, whether the loan clearly appears in the document or is shown in any other form

---

Notes:

• Damage to the offended party is required.
• Scope – any other kind of conceivable deceit may fall under this article

Example: X, an agent of an insurance company, was convicted for the crime of estafa for allegedly inducing Y to enter into a fraudulent investment opportunity. X made misrepresentations to Y that the latter’s money would be invested in the insurance company and not to an investment company. X’s fraudulent representations concerning the investment supported her conviction for estafa under Art. 315 (2)(a). (Osorio v. People, G.R. No. 207711)

Elements of Knowingly Removing Mortgaged Personal Property

• That personal property is mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law;
• That the offender knows that such property is so mortgaged;
• That he removes such mortgaged personal property to any province or city other than the one in which it was located at the time of the execution of the mortgage;
• That the removal is permanent; and
• That there is no written consent of the mortgagee or his executors, administrator or assignees to such removal.

Notes:

• The offender need not be the mortgagor; it may be “any person”.
• Purpose is to protect mortgagee who should be able to have a ready access to, and easy reach of, the property subject of mortgage
• Chattel mortgage must be registered.
• Removal under Art. 319(1) requires knowing removal of the mortgaged personal property to another province or city without the mortgagee’s written consent; a separate intent to defraud is not an element.
• Filing a civil action for collection instead of foreclosure does not, by itself, relieve the accused of criminal liability under Art. 319.

Elements of Selling or Pledging Personal Property Already Pledged

• That personal property is already mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law;
• That the offender, who is the mortgagor of such property, sells or pledges the same or any part thereof; and
• That there is no consent of the mortgagee written on the back of the mortgage and notes on the record thereof in the office of the Register of Deeds

Note: Damage to mortgagee is not essential. If damage accrues, it may give rise to estafa by means of deceit.

Selling or pledging mortgaged property (Art. 319, para. 2) and Estafa by disposing of encumbered property (Art. 316, para. 2), Distinguished

Punishable Acts/Persons Liable:

The statute prescribes reclusion perpetua to death for these forms of arson, but death may no longer be imposed; reclusion perpetua is imposed instead (Revised Penal Code, Art. 320, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659; Republic Act No. 9346, Secs. 2–3):

• Any person who shall burn (7 acts)
• One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to one single act or simultaneous acts of burning;
• Building of public or private ownership generally open to public or where people usually gather or congregate for a purpose, regardless of whether the offender had knowledge that there are persons present or whether building is inhabited or not;
• Train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or airplane, for transportation or conveyance, public use, leisure or entertainment;
• Building, factory, warehouse installation, and any appurtenance thereto for service of public utilities;
• Any building to conceal/destroy incriminatory evidence, conceal bankruptcy, defraud creditors, or collect from insurance;
• Arsenal, shipyard, storehouse, or military powder or fireworks factory, ordnance, archives or general museum of the Government; and
• Any factory or warehouse of inflammable or explosive materials located in an inhabited place
• Two (2) or more persons or a group of persons who destroy property by fire
• Irrespective of the above-mentioned qualifying circumstances, and
• Regardless of whether the purpose is merely to burn or destroy or as an overt act to commit another violation of law

Elements of Malicious Mischief:

• That the offender deliberately caused damage to the property of another;
• That such act does not constitute arson or other crimes involving destruction; and
• That the act of damaging another’s property be committed merely for the sake of damaging it.

Notes:

• Third element presupposes hate, revenge, or other evil motive of the offender or the mere pleasure of destroying
• Damage includes not only loss but also diminution (e.g. defacing another’s house)
• If damage is merely incidental to another crime, it does not constitute a separate malicious-mischief offense; liability for the other crime may remain. Damage caused through punishable imprudence or negligence may give rise to criminal liability under Art. 365.
• Intent to gain by removing or making use of the fruits or objects of a property after it is damaged makes it theft (Art 308 par. 2).

Art. 328. Special Cases of Malicious Mischief

Any person who shall cause damage to obstruct the performance of public functions, or use any poisonous or corrosive substance; or spread any infection or contagion among cattle; or who causes damage to the property of the National Museum or National Library, or to any archive or registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public

---

REQUISITES:

• That the offended party had trusted the offender;
• That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party; and
• That the act be committed with obvious ungratefulness.

18. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY (PAR. 18)

19. WHEN AS A MEANS TO THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME, A WALL, ROOF, FLOOR, DOOR, OR WINDOW BE BROKEN (PAR. 19)

Breaking as Means to Commission of The crime vs. After an Unlawful Entry

Where breaking of door or window is lawful:

• To make an arrest, an officer may break into a building or enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if, after announcing the officer’s authority and purpose, the officer is refused admittance. (Sec. 11, Rule 113, ROC)
• After giving notice of purpose and authority and being refused admittance, an officer may break open any door or window to execute a search warrant. (Sec. 7, Rule 126, ROC) The officer may also do so to liberate himself or a person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein. (Sec. 8, Rule 126, ROC)