2024 Criminal Law, Q15

The Ombudsman found probable cause against Governor Rocky and Quentin, a private individual, who both allegedly conspired in committing a violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. However, Governor Rocky was killed in an ambush. Yet, the Ombudsman still filed the information against Quentin before the Sandiganbayan. Quentin moved to quash the information on the ground of extinction of criminal liability. Quentin argued that the prosecution for violation of the anti-graft law cannot prosper with the death of Governor Rocky because there is no public officer charged in the information. Is Quentin’s criminal liability extinguished with the death of Governor Rocky? Explain.

Quick check

Why is Quentin criminal liability under RA 3019 not extinguished by Governor Rocky death before the Information was filed?

Under People v. Go, when may a private individual be prosecuted alone for violation of Section 3 of RA 3019?

What is the legal effect of death on criminal liability under Article 89 of the Revised Penal Code?

How does Philippine law treat private individuals who conspire with public officers to commit graft under RA 3019?

Choices available with full access.

What is the effect of conspiracy on the criminal liability of surviving participants when one co-conspirator dies?

Choices available with full access.

Unlock the full Criminal Law answers

Learn more about these topics

1. Death Extinguishes Liability
Under Article 89, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is extinguished by the death of the convict or accused. However, death is strictly personal to the deceased offender and does not extinguish the crime itself or the criminal liability of surviving co-conspirators. In a conspiracy, the criminal act of one participant is legally considered the act of all. Consequently, the death of a public officer prior to the filing of a formal Information does not insulate a surviving private co-conspirator from prosecution.

2. Private Co-Conspirators
Although Section 3 of Republic Act No. 3019 primarily targets public officers, private individuals who conspire with public officials in committing prohibited corrupt acts incur equal criminal liability. Under established jurisprudence, private persons can be prosecuted and convicted for graft offenses when acting in conspiracy with public officers. The presence of a public officer is necessary to establish the offense during the commission of the act, but it is not required that the public officer remain alive or physically prosecuted in court alongside the private co-conspirator.

3. Exception in People v. Go
In People v. Go, the Supreme Court established a clear exception to the general rule that private individuals must be tried alongside public officers under Section 3 of RA 3019. When the public officer dies before the Information is filed, or is otherwise beyond the court jurisdiction, the private co-conspirator may be indicted and tried alone. Because conspiracy imputes collective guilt, the death of the public officer merely terminates his personal liability without barring the prosecution of the surviving private individual.

About these questions and answers
The questions reproduced here are the official texts of the Philippine Bar Examinations, published by the Supreme Court. They are reproduced for study purposes.The suggested answers are the author’s own.

They are not official answers, have no connection with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Confidant, or any bar review institution, and are not endorsed by any of them. Official answer keys, where released, should be preferred over anything here.Nothing on this page is legal advice, and reading it creates no lawyer-client relationship. Do not rely on any suggested answer in an actual legal matter. Consult counsel on your own facts.Suggested answers reflect the law and jurisprudence the author considers applicable as of the date shown.

Where a question comes from an earlier examination, the suggested answer applies the law as it now stands, which may differ from the law in force when the question was given, and may therefore differ from what would have been the correct answer at that time. Where the difference is material, the answer notes it.The practice scoring feature measures wording overlap with the suggested answer. It is not a grade, carries no official weight, and says nothing about whether your reasoning is sound.Errors are possible. If you find one, please tell me and I will correct it.Last reviewed: October 2026