Clepto went alone to a high-end busy shop and decided to take one of the smaller purses without paying for it. Overcame by conscience, she decided to leave her own purse in place of the one she took. Her act was discovered and Cleptowas charged with theft. She claimed that there was no theft, as the store suffered no injuryor prejudice because she had left a purse in place of the one she took. Comment on her defense. (3%)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
Clepto's defense is untenable, and she is criminally liable for Theft. Under Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, Theft is committed by taking personal property of another with intent to gain without
Unlock the full Criminal Law answers365 days of full access. GCash, Maya and card accepted.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
What crime is committed when a person takes a purse from a shop without paying, but leaves her own purse as a replacement?
Taking personal property of another without consent constitutes consummated theft regardless of leaving a replacement.
Is economic injury or financial damage to the owner an essential element of the crime of Theft under Article 308 RPC?
Under Article 308 of the RPC, financial injury or economic damage is not an element of theft.
How is intent to gain (animus lucrandi) established in a prosecution for simple theft?
Intent to gain is presumed by law from the unlawful taking of personal property without consent.
When is the crime of Theft considered fully consummated under Philippine criminal law?
Choices available with full access.
What is the legal effect of returning or replacing stolen property after the unlawful taking has been completed?
Choices available with full access.
Learn more about these topics
1. Theft Elements
Under Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, takes personal property of another without the owner's consent. Physical taking of another's personal property without authorization completes the taking element. Material damage, financial injury, or economic prejudice to the property owner is not an element of theft under Philippine penal law.
2. Intent to Gain
Under Philippine criminal jurisprudence, intent to gain, or animus lucrandi, is presumed from the deliberate and unlawful taking of personal property belonging to another without the owner's consent. Intent to gain does not require the offender to derive actual monetary profit or retain the stolen item permanently. The unlawful taking itself satisfies the mental element of intent to gain, which cannot be negated by substituting or replacing the taken item with another object.
3. Consummation of Theft
Under Article 6 in relation to Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft is fully consummated at the precise moment the offender places the personal property under his full control and possession, even if only for a brief period. Returning, replacing, or offering compensation for the stolen property after the unlawful taking has been completed does not extinguish criminal liability. Subsequent acts of restitution or replacement affect only civil liability.