Philippine Bar review · Question

Practice question: Single Impulse Rule

Multiple Choice Easy

Practice question

For the first branch of Article 48, which distinction is central to the single-impulse discussion?
  1. The accused’s preferred name versus nickname.
  2. One physical act versus several distinct physical acts.
  3. The lawyer’s age versus the witness’s age.
  4. The victim’s residence versus the court’s street address.
  5. The number of pages in the information.

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.