Practice question
Which can explain the nonproduction of the intended offense under Article 4(2)?
- The offender merely changes personal preference before any act
- The act is inherently impossible or the means are essentially inadequate or ineffectual
- The trial is held on a weekday
- The victim later forgives the offender
- The accused dislikes the prosecutor
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — RPC Articles4(2),6 and59: impossible objective or means distinguished from stages of a possible felony.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1992/oct1992/gr_103119_1992.html — Intod v. Court of Appeals, G.R. 103119, October 21, 1992, main decision: factual and legal impossibility, absent intended victim and empty-pocket example.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/jul2009/gr_162540_2009.html — Jacinto v. People, G.R. 162540, July 13, 2009, main decision: evil intent, impossible taking of a worthless check and distinction from a separate criminal scheme.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.