Practice question
Two persons agree to commit a Section 9 access-device fraud. One then performs an act to effect their agreed object. Both are proved parties to that conspiracy. They claim Section 11 applies only after every planned fraudulent transaction succeeds. Which is correct?
- The claim is correct; an implementing act is never enough.
- Section 11 expressly addresses the conspiracy when one or more conspirators does an act to effect its object.
- The agreement automatically makes every acquaintance a conspirator.
- Section 11 applies only to public officers.
- The charge must be dismissed if the devices were digital.
Legal references
- RA 8484, Sections 3, 9–14 and 17, retained provisions read with RA 11449 amendments: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1998/ra_8484_1998.html
- RA 11449, Sections 2–5 amending access-device definitions, prohibited acts, penalties and presumption threshold: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2019/ra_11449_2019.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.