Practice question
A daughter and an unrelated friend jointly commit simple theft of her father's property. Assume the daughter satisfies Article 332 and the friend's participation as a principal is proved. The friend claims that the daughter's family exemption extends to every participant in their joint act. Which conclusion follows?
- Both are exempt solely because one participant is a daughter.
- The stranger obtains the exemption if the daughter requests it.
- The daughter's exemption necessarily destroys the theft itself for all participants.
- Article 332 does not extend its exemption to the participating stranger.
- Only the stranger's age determines the exemption.
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, specified articles, as amended: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426; Articles 19, 20 and 332.
- Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales Vda. de Carungcong v People, G.R. No. 181409, February 11, 2010, main decision, necessary means and falsification-estafa: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/feb2010/gr_181409_2010.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.