Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Single Impulse Rule

Multiple Choice Easy

Practice question

Does a single criminal impulse automatically merge every series of intentional criminal acts into one Article 48 compound crime?
  1. No; the applicable statutory requirements and any narrowly recognized exception must be established.
  2. Yes, regardless of the number of distinct acts.
  3. Yes, whenever the accused uses the same weapon.
  4. Yes, whenever the crimes occur on the same date.
  5. Yes, whenever the accused admits a common motive.

Legal references

  • Revised Penal Code, Article 48 as amended, text and current two-branch rule reproduced in People v Reyes, G.R. No. 260030, May 19, 2025: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/may2025/gr_260030_2025.html
  • People v Mision, G.R. No. 63480, February 26, 1991, main decision, separate acts and limits of single-impulse reasoning: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/feb1991/gr_63480_1991.html
  • People v Nelmida, G.R. No. 184500, September 11, 2012, en banc main decision, Article 48 and limited Lawas exception: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/sep2012/gr_184500_2012.html
  • Ivler v Modesto-San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, November 17, 2010, main decision, Article 365 indivisible quasi-offense distinguished from Article 48: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/nov2010/gr_172716_2010.html

Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.