Elements ––
Serious Illegal Detention or Kidnapping with Ransom is punished under Art. 267 of the RPC; the following elements must concur:
(a) the offender is a private individual;
(b) he kidnaps or detains another, or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
(c) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
(d) in the commission of the offense any of the following circumstances is present:
(1) the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days;
(2) it is committed by simulating public authority;
(3) any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or
(4) the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer; in addition, the maximum penalty of death is imposable should the purpose of the detention or kidnapping was to extort money, even if qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 267 are not present. (People vs. Fajardo, G.R. No. 216065, April 18, 2018)
Kidnapping committed by a public officer in his personal capacity
Kidnapping is not part of the functions of a soldier; even if a public officer has the legal duty to detain a person, the public officer must be able to show the existence of legal grounds for the detention; without these legal grounds, the public officer is deemed to have acted in a private capacity and is considered a “private individual”; penalty. (In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus, SSgt. Osorio vs. Asst. State Prosecutor Navera, G.R. No. 223272, Feb. 26, 2018)
Elements of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Art. 267 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, are:
(1) the offender is a private individual;
(2) he kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
(3) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
(4) in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:
(a) the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days; or (b) it is committed by simulating public authority; or
(c) serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or
(d) the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer; if the victim of kidnapping and serious illegal detention is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial. (People vs. Fabro, G.R. No. 208441, July 17, 2017)
The elements of the crime are as follows:
(a) the offender is a private individual;
(b) he kidnaps or detains another, or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
(c) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
(d) in the commission of the offense any of the following circumstances is present:
i) the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days;
ii) it is committed by simulating public authority;
iii) any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or
iv) the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer. (People vs. Lidasan, G.R. No. 227425, Sept. 04, 2017)
Where the victim is a minor, lack of consent is presumed. (People vs. Fabro, G.R. No. 208441, July 17, 2017)
In order to prove kidnapping, the prosecution must establish that the victim was “forcefully transported, locked up or restrained”; it must be proven that the accused intended “to deprive the victim of his liberty”. (People vs. Avancena, G.R. No. 200512, June 07, 2017)
The illegal detention coupled with a demand for money is tantamount to serious illegal detention or kidnapping punishable under Art. 267 of the RPC; the demand for ransom consummates the crime of serious illegal detention or kidnapping because the actual payment or receipt by the kidnappers of the money is immaterial. (People vs. Fajardo, G.R. No. 216065, April 18, 2018)
Although the crime of kidnapping can only be committed by a private individual, the fact that the accused is a public official does not automatically preclude the filing of an information for kidnapping against him; a public officer who detains a person for the purpose of extorting ransom cannot be said to be acting in an official capacity; he may be prosecuted under Art. 267 of the Revised Penal Code if it is shown that he committed acts unrelated to the functions of his office. (People vs. PO3 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, Aug. 02, 2017)
Not sufficiently established in this case; the fact alone of waiting for the victim to fall asleep and then and there tying his hands and feet, was not determinant of intent to actually detain the victim or deprive his liberty; Courts should not indulge in speculation no matter how strong the guilt of the accused. (People vs. Villanueva, G.R. No. 218958, Dec. 13, 2017)
The essence of the crime of kidnapping is “the actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty coupled with the intent of the accused to effect it”; deprivation of a person’s liberty can be committed in different ways. (People vs. PO3 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, Aug. 02, 2017)
Elements ––
A conviction for the crime of kidnapping or serious illegal detention requires the concurrence of the following elements:
1. The offender is a private individual;
2. That individual kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives the latter of liberty;
3. The act of detention or kidnapping is illegal;
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:
a. The kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days;
b. It is committed by one who simulates public authority;
c. Any serious physical injury is inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained, or any threat to kill that person is made; and
d. The person kidnapped or detained is a minor, a female or a public officer. (People vs. PO3 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, Aug. 02, 2017)
The crime has the following elements:
(1) the accused is a private individual;
(2) the accused kidnaps or detains another or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
(3) the act of detention or kidnapping is illegal; and
(4) in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:
(a) the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days;
(b) it is committed by simulating public authority;
(c) any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or
(d) the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female or a public official; the essence of the crime of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim’s liberty coupled with the intent of the accused to effect it. (People vs. Villanueva, G.R. No. 218958, Dec. 13, 2017)
2016 Bar Exam
XI
Angelino, a Filipino, is a transgender who underwent gender reassignment and had implants in different parts of her body. She changed her name to Angelina and was a finalist in the Miss Gay International. She came back to the Philippines and while she was walking outside her home, she was abducted by Max and Razzy who took her to a house in the province. She was then placed in a room and Razzy forced her to have sex with him at knife’s point. After the act, it dawned upon Razzy that Angelina is actually a male. Incensed, Razzy called Max to help him beat Angelina. The beatings that Angelina received eventually caused her death.
What crime or crimes, if any, were committed? Explain. (5%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER
Razzy is liable for kidnapping with homicide. Abducting Angelino is not forcible abduction since the victim in this crime must be a woman. Gender. reassignment will not make him a woman within the meaning of Article 342 of the Revised Penal Code. There is no showing, moreover, that at the time abduction is committed with lewd design; hence, his abduction constitutes illegal detention. Since Angelino was killed in the course of the detention, the crime constitutes kidnapping and serious illegal detention with homicide under Article 267. Having sexual intercourse with Angelino is not rape through sexual inter course since the victim in this crime must be a woman. This act is not rape through sexual assault, either, Razzy did not insert his penis into the anal orifice or mouth of Angelino or an instrument or object into anal orifice or genital orifice, hence, this act constitutes acts of lasciviousness under Article 336. Since the acts of lasciviousness is committed by reason or occasion of kidnapping, it will be integrated into one and indivisible felony of kidnapping with homicide (People v. De Leon, G.R. No. 179943, June 26, 2009; People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 05, 2016; People v. Laog, G.R. No. 178321, October 5, 2011; People v. Larronaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, February 3, 2004).
Max is liable for kidnapping with homicide as an accomplice since he concurred in the criminal design of Razzy in depriving Angelino his liberty and supplied the former material aid in an efficacious way by helping him beat the latter.
2014 Bar Exam
XII.
Sexy boarded a taxi on her way home from a party Because she was already tipsy, she fell asleep. Pogi, the taxi driver, decided to take advantage of the situation and drove Sexy to a deserted place where he raped her for a period of two (2) weeks.
What crime did Pogi commit? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime committed by Pogi is kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape. Since Sexy was raped for two weeks, there was a clear deprivation of liberty, which constitutes the crime of kidnapping with serious illegal detention. This crime is committed when one kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives her of his liberty and the kidnapping or detention has lasted more than three days or the victim is a female. Since as a consequence of the detention, the victim is raped, the crime committed is special complex crime of kidnapping with rape. No matter how many rapes had been committed in the special complex crime of kidnapping with rape, the resultant crime is only one kidnapping with rape. This is because these composite acts are regarded as a single indivisible offense as in fact R.A. No. 7659 punishes these acts with only a single penalty (People v. Mirandilla, Jr., G.R. NO July 27, 2011).
XXIII.
Carla, four (4) years old, was kidnapped by Enrique. the tricycle driver engaged by her parents to drive her to and from school every day. Enrique wrote a ransom note demanding that Carla’s parents pay him P500,000.00 ransom in exchange for her liberty. However, before the ransom note could be received by Carla’s parents, Enrique’s hideout was discovered by the police. Carla was rescued while Enrique was arrested. The prosecutor considered that the ransom note was never received by Carla’s parents and filed a case of “Impossible crime to commit kidnapping against Enrique.
Is the prosecutor correct? If he is not correct, can he instead file a case of grave coercion? (4%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The crime committed by Enrique is kidnapping for ransom. Even before the rapsom note was received, the crime of kidnapping with serious illegal detention had already been committed. The act cannot be considered an impossible crime because there was no inherent improbability of its accomplishment or the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. The delivery of the ransom note after the rescue of the victim did not extinguish the offense, which had already been consummated when Enrique deprived Carla of her liberty. The sending of the ransom note would have had the effect only of increasing the penalty to death under the last paragraph of Article 267 (People v. Tan, G.R. No. 95322, March 1, 1993). Furthermore, kidnapping is a crime against liberty while in impossible crime it is important that the accused committed an act that would have been a crime against person or property.
The prosecutor cannot file a case of grave coercion instead, since as discussed above the crime committed by Enrique is kidnapping for ransom.