DAYEdalera

November 21, 2006 is my first time to recite in Dean Carlos Ortega’s Criminal Law Review Class. My title explicitly told you what I feel exactly the moment he called my name.

Dean Ortega: Ms. Tornino, Claudette… Am I right?

Daye: Sir, it’s Tolentino

Dean Ortega: You’ve written your name very small, you cannot write this small when you take the bar, Ms. Tolentino

Daye: Yes sir. I am very sorry for that.

Dean Ortega: What is Error in Personae and it’s effect in the liability of the accused?

Daye: Error in Personae is an instance where the actual victim was not the intended victim of the offender, sir. The criminal liability of the offender will be governed by Art. 49 of the RPC, sir.

Dean Ortega: And what does Art. 49 provides?

Daye: The provision provides that if a graver offense was committed than what was actually intended by the offender, the penalty to be imposed shall that be of the penalty intended in it’s maximum period.

Dean Ortega: blah…blah…blah… (lecturing), What if the felony committed was lesser than what was actually intended?

Daye: Sir, Art. 49 will still apply.

Dean Ortega: Why?

Daye: Sir, it’s because Art 49 explicitly provides that if a graver offense was committed than what was actually intended by the offender, or vice versa, the penalty to be imposed shall that be of the penalty intended in it’s maximum period.

Dean Ortega: (gave a hypothetical question)

A intends to kill B
But instead of killing B,
He killed C, knowing that it was B.
C died.

If you are the judge, will you consider it error in personae? Would be the effect in his criminal liability.

Daye: Sir, it’s not error in personae.

Dean Ortega: It is clear from the problem that the actual victim was not the intended victim of the offender, isn’t it what you have defined as Error in Personae?

Daye: Ah sir, Error in Personae presupposes a graver or lesser offense resulted from the act. In the case you have given, the crime committed is still consummated homicide but in this case the crime was committed against C, therefore A will be liable for Homicide independently of his liability for trying to kill B. Therefore, Art. 49 will not apply.

Dean Ortega: In that case, your answer would be shorter if you have just told us, THERE WOULD BE NO EFFECT. (blah…blah…blah… Sermons on how to make your answers responsive to the question)

Sigh. One recitation down, I have a strong hunch that I will be called too in Civ Rev 2 class. My only consolation, Dean Ortega didn’t call me stupid. : )