Threats VS PDF

Preview

Summary

THREATS VS. COERCIONTHREATS COERCIONAS TO CHARACTER OF THREATENED HARMThe threatened harm or wrong is future and conditionalThe threatened harm or wrong is immediate and direct AS TO USE OF INTERMEDIARY It may be done through an intermediary or in writingIt cannot be done by means of an intermediary...

Description

THREATS VS. COERCION THREATS COERCION AS TO CHARACTER OF THREATENED HARM The threatened harm or wrong is future and The threatened harm or wrong is immediate conditional and direct AS TO USE OF INTERMEDIARY It may be done through an intermediary or in It cannot be done by means of an writing intermediary or in writing AS TO MANNER OF COMMISSION Generally, it is committed by means of Generally, it is committed by violence, intimidation which is future and conditional although it may also be by intimidation if it is serious enough, direct. Immediate and personal (e.g. intimidation with firearm) AS TO WHO MAY BE INTIMIDATED Intimidation is directed personally Intimidation is directed against the victim or his family.

GRAVE THREATS AND LIGHT THREATS GRAVE THREATS (ART. 282) LIGHT THREATS (ART. 283) AS TO ACT THREATENED TO BE COMMITTED Act threatened amounts to a crime Act threatened does not amount to a crime AS TO DEMAND FOR MONEY The demand for money or imposition of any The demand for money or imposition of any condition is an essential element, whether the other condition is not an essential element condition is attained or not

OTHER LIGHT THREATS AND GRAVE THREATS AND LIGHT THREATS, DISTINGUISHED OTHER LIGHT THREATS (ART 285)

No demand for money

No condition imposed Threat is not deliberate

GRAVE THREATS (ART. 282) AND LIGHT THREATS (ART. 283) AS TO DEMAND In certain cases, demand for money is material AS TO CONDITION In certain cases, imposed condition is material AS TO THREAT Threat is deliberate

HIGHWAY ROBBERY UNDER PD NO. 532 and BRIGANDAGE UNDER THE RPC HIGHWAY ROBBERY (PD 532)

ROBBERY IN A HIGHWAY BRIGANDAGE AS TO CONSPIRACY AMONG THE MEMBERS Mere conspiracy to constitute the offense of Mere formation of a band for any purpose brigandage is not punishable since it indicated in the law is punishable presupposes that acts defined are actually committed AS TO FORMATION OF A BAND Offenders need not constitute a band. One Offenders must be a band of robbers (i.e., person can commit the crime there are more than three malefactors) AS TO THE VICTIM Anybody could be the victim There is a preconceived victim AS TO THE COMMISSION OF ROBBERY It must not be an isolated case of robbery It is immaterial that the robbery was committed for the first time AS TO ACCOMPLICES Those who abet brigandage are accomplices Those who profit from the loot are liable under Section 4 under Art. 307 or for fencing.

BRIGANDAGE AND ROBBERY IN BAND BRIGANDAGE (ART. 306)

ROBBERY IN BAND (ART. 296)

AS TO PURPOSE The purpose is to: The purpose is to commit robbery, but not 1. Commit robbery to highways; necessarily in highways 2. To kidnap persons for ransom; or 3. Any other purpose attained by force and violence AS TO AGREEMENT Agreement is to commit several robberies Agreement is to commit a particular robbery AS TO ACT PUNISHED Mere formation for any of the above purposes Actual commission of robbery is necessary as mere conspiracy to commit robbery is not is punished punishable Both crimes require that the offenders form a band of robbers

THEFT vs. ROBBERY THEFT (ART. 308) ROBBERY (ART. 293-294) AS TO THE PRESENCE OF VIOLENCE The offender does not use violence or There is violence or intimidation or force intimidation or does not enter a house or upon things building through any of the means specified in Art. 299 or Art. 302 in taking personal, property of another with intent to gain AS TO THE CONSENT OF THE OWNER It suffices that the consent on the part of the It is necessary that the taking is against the owner is lacking will of the owner

ARTICLE 316, Paragraph 3 That the owner of any personal property who shall wrongfully take it from its lawful possessor, to the prejudice of the latter or any third person; ELEMENTS: a. That the offender is the owner of Personal property; b. That said personal property is in the lawful possession of another c. That the offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful possessor (if taken from an unlawful possessor, Art. 429 of the Civil Code applies) d. That prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or third person NOTE: The crime will still be estafa even if the owner takes the personalty from the lawful possessor under the modes of taking in theft or robbery which latter crimes cannot be committed by the owner on his property....