Revised Penal Code (RPC). Art. 128 Violation of Domicile Art. 280 Tresprass to Dwelling

Summary

This video script delves into the distinctions between Article 128 and Article 280 of the United Nations, focusing on the crimes of 'violation of domicile' and 'trespass to dwelling'. It clarifies that violation of domicile, a crime against the state's fundamental laws, is committed by public officers or employees and includes unauthorized entry, search, and refusal to leave a dwelling. In contrast, trespass to dwelling, a crime against personal liberty, is committed by private individuals. The script uses hypothetical scenarios to illustrate the differences in liability between public officers and private persons in these legal contexts.

Takeaways

• 📜 Article 128 and Article 280 are part of the legal framework addressing different types of dwelling violations.
• 🏠 Article 128, violation of domicile, falls under Title II, which deals with crimes against the fundamental law of the state, while Article 280, trespass to dwelling, is categorized under Title IX, concerning crimes against personal liberty and security.
• 👮‍♂️ Violation of domicile typically involves public officers or employees who misuse their authority, such as entering a dwelling against the owner's will, searching without consent, or refusing to leave when asked.
• 🚷 Trespass to dwelling, as per Article 280, is generally committed by private individuals and involves entering a dwelling against the owner's will without additional acts.
• 🔍 The distinction between the two articles lies in the offender's status, the nature of the acts committed, and the legal titles under which they are categorized.
• 📝 Article 128 includes three specific acts: entering a dwelling against the owner's will, searching papers or effects without consent, and refusing to leave after being asked.
• 🛡️ Crimes against the fundamental law of the state, such as violation of domicile, often involve a breach of constitutional rights like unreasonable searches and seizures.
• 🙅‍♂️ A public officer is not liable under Article 128 if they enter a dwelling with the owner's permission, even if later asked to leave.
• 🚨 A private individual entering a dwelling against the owner's will without any additional acts would be guilty of trespass to dwelling under Article 280, not violation of domicile.
• 🤔 The script provides scenarios to differentiate between the two articles, emphasizing the importance of the offender's status and the specific acts committed.
• 📚 The video concludes with a review of the key differences between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling, highlighting the legal distinctions and implications.

Q & A

What are the two articles discussed in the video?

The video discusses the difference between Article 128 and Article 280.

Under which title does violation of domicile fall?

Violation of domicile falls under Title II, which is crimes against the fundamental law of the state.

Which title does the crime of trespass to dwelling belong to?

Trespass to dwelling is under Title IX, which deals with crimes against personal liberty and security.

What are some examples of crimes against the fundamental law of the state?

Examples include unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as violations of the Bill of Rights such as Articles 124, 125, and 126.

What is the general rule regarding the offenders under Title II crimes?

The general rule is that almost all offenders under Title II crimes are public officers and employees, except for Article 133.

What is the exception to the general rule of offenders under Title II crimes?

The exception is Article 133, which deals with offending religious feelings and can be committed by anyone, not just public officers or employees.

What are the elements of Article 128?

The elements of Article 128 include the offender being a public officer or employee, entering the dwelling of another against the latter's will, searching papers or effects without consent, and refusing to leave after being asked.

According to the video, who can be liable for crimes against the fundamental laws under Article 128?

Public officers who are authorized to execute search warrants and warrants of arrest can be liable for crimes against the fundamental laws under Article 128.

What is the difference between the acts punished under Article 128 and Article 280?

Article 128 includes entering a dwelling against the will of the owner, searching papers or effects without consent, and refusing to leave after being asked. Article 280 focuses on entering a dwelling against the will of the owner without the additional acts.

In the scenario where a policeman takes shelter in Pedro's house and is asked to leave, is the policeman liable under Article 128?

No, the policeman is not liable under Article 128 because he did not enter against the will of the owner, did not search papers or effects without consent, and was not asked to leave after surreptitiously entering.

If a policeman enters a private house without a judicial order and over the owner's opposition, is he guilty of trespass to dwelling?

No, the policeman would be guilty of violation of domicile under Article 128, as trespass to dwelling under Article 280 is committed by a private individual.

What is the criminal liability of Juan if he enters Pedro's dwelling against Pedro's will?

If Juan is a public officer, his crime is violation of domicile under Article 128. If he is a private individual, his criminal liability is trespass to dwelling under Article 280.

Outlines

00:00

📜 Legal Distinctions Between Article 128 and Article 280

This paragraph discusses the differences between Article 128 and Article 280 in the context of Philippine law. Article 128, under Title II, pertains to violations of the fundamental law of the state, specifically addressing public officers and employees who commit acts such as entering a dwelling against the owner's will, searching without consent, or refusing to leave after being asked. It emphasizes the infringement on the Bill of Rights, such as unreasonable searches and seizures, and the due process clause. Article 280, under Title IX, deals with trespass to dwelling committed by private individuals. The distinction lies in the offender's status and the nature of the crime, with Article 128 focusing on public officers violating domicile and Article 280 on private individuals trespassing.

05:02

🔍 Scenario Analysis of Domicile Violation and Trespassing

The second paragraph delves into hypothetical scenarios to illustrate the application of Article 128 and Article 280. It clarifies that a public officer entering a dwelling with the owner's consent, as in the case of a policeman seeking shelter, does not constitute a violation under Article 128. Conversely, a public officer entering a private house without a judicial order and against the owner's will would be guilty of violation of domicile. The paragraph also distinguishes between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling based on the offender's status and the act committed. It concludes with a review of the key differences, reiterating that violation of domicile is committed by public officers and is a crime against the fundamental law of the state, while trespass to dwelling is committed by private individuals and is a crime against personal liberty and security.

Keywords

💡Article 128

Article 128 refers to a specific section of the law that deals with the violation of domicile by public officers or employees. It is part of the crimes against the fundamental law of the state. In the video, it is discussed in the context of the offender entering a dwelling against the will of the owner, which is a key element of this violation.

💡Article 280

Article 280 pertains to the crime of trespass to dwelling, which is committed by a private individual entering another's dwelling against their will. It is distinguished from Article 128 in that the offender in this case is not a public officer or employee, and it falls under crimes against personal liberty and security.

💡Dwelling

A dwelling is a place where a person resides, and it is central to the theme of the video as it is the object of the crime in both Article 128 and Article 280. The video discusses how entering a dwelling against the will of the owner constitutes a violation of the law.

💡Fundamental Law of the State

This term refers to the basic principles and laws that govern a nation. In the video, it is mentioned in relation to Title II, which includes crimes against the fundamental law of the state, such as the violation of domicile under Article 128.

💡Public Officer or Employee

A public officer or employee is someone who holds a position in the government and is authorized to execute certain legal actions, such as search warrants and warrants of arrest. The video explains that these individuals are liable for crimes against the fundamental law of the state, specifically under Article 128.

💡Private Individual

A private individual is a person who is not a public officer or employee. In the context of the video, the offender in Article 280, which deals with trespass to dwelling, is a private individual, as opposed to a public officer or employee who would be the offender under Article 128.

💡Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security

This category of crimes includes offenses that infringe upon an individual's personal freedom and security. The video mentions that Article 280, which deals with trespass to dwelling, falls under this category, as opposed to crimes against the fundamental law of the state.

💡Due Process Clause

The due process clause is a legal principle that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. It is mentioned in the video in relation to crimes against the fundamental law of the state, emphasizing the importance of legal procedures in the context of violations of domicile.

💡Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights typically refers to a set of fundamental rights granted to individuals by a constitution or legal system. In the video, it is mentioned in the context of violations of certain provisions of the Bill of Rights, such as unreasonable searches and seizures, which are relevant to the crimes discussed.

💡Trespasser

A trespasser is someone who enters another's property without permission. The term is used in the video to describe the offender in Article 280, who enters a dwelling against the will of the owner, thus committing the crime of trespass to dwelling.

💡Offending Religious Feelings

This term refers to the act of causing offense or disrespect to someone's religious beliefs or practices. In the video, it is mentioned in the context of Article 133, which is an exception to the general rule that crimes against the fundamental law of the state are committed by public officers and employees.

Highlights

The video discusses the differences between Article 128 and Article 280 of the United States Code.

Article 128 pertains to the violation of domicile by public officers or employees, while Article 280 covers trespass to dwelling by private individuals.

Violation of domicile falls under Title II, which addresses crimes against the fundamental law of the state, including infringements on the Bill of Rights.

Trespass to dwelling is categorized under Title IX, focusing on crimes against personal liberty and security.

The video explains that most offenders under Title II are public officers and employees, with the exception of Article 133 which can be committed by anyone.

Article 128 specifically targets public officers authorized to execute search warrants and warrants of arrest.

The acts punished under Article 128 include entering a dwelling against the owner's will, searching papers or effects without consent, and refusing to leave after being asked.

Article 280 is less specific, focusing solely on entering a dwelling against the owner's will without additional acts.

The video provides a scenario analysis to determine liability under Article 128, involving a policeman taking shelter in a house and being asked to leave.

The policeman in the scenario is not liable under Article 128 as he did not commit any of the specified acts.

A policeman entering a private house without a judicial order and against the owner's will may be guilty of violation of domicile, not trespass to dwelling.

The video clarifies that trespass to dwelling, under Article 280, is committed by a private individual, not a public officer.

Juan, as a hypothetical private individual, would be liable for trespass to dwelling if he enters Pedro's house against his will.

The video concludes by reviewing the distinctions between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling, emphasizing the different legal contexts and offenders.

Study hard and pray harder is the closing advice, encouraging viewers to work diligently in their studies and seek spiritual guidance.

Transcripts

hello everyone in this video we will

discuss the difference between article

128

and article 280. united

now violation of the missile at

trespasser dwelling

so let's start differentially violation

of domicile

it is under title ii which is crimes

against the fundamental law of the state

while untrespassed dwelling naman i

under title 9

or crimes against personal liberty and

security details are titled two

sinasabinating crimes against the

fundamental law of the state cassette

they violate some of the provisions of

the bill of rights

like for example unreasonable searches

and seizures

union articles 128 129

and 130 wherein they violate section 2

of the bill of rights tapos we also have

the due process clause or no person

shall be deprived of life liberty or

property without due process of law

so ethereum are articles one two four

one two five and one two six

where an individual is unlawfully

deprived of

liberty crimes against the fundamental

law of the state

casino fundamentally

now on counterpart now title ii is a

title nine details are titled

almost all of the offenders here are

public officers

and employees maliban along so article

133 which is

offending the religious feelings dietosa

offending the religious feelings under

133

anahala gaydon yes it may be committed

by anyone

or by any person hindi lamong limited so

public officers

and employees under title ii

which has crimes against the fundamental

law of the state almost all of the

offenders here

human reliable daytona crimes are public

officers

and employees that is the general rule

again

arbitrary detention delaying release

explosion

violation of domicile a searching

domicile without witnesses

crimes against religious worship

interruption of religious worship

all of the offenders there are public

officers and employees

accept an exception d2i article 133

which is under title 2 then it on

article 133i

offending the religious feelings at an

offender dito i

hindi lemon public officer or employee

detos article 133 it can be committed by

anyone which means that it can be

committed by any person

not just public officer or employee okay

so let's proceed now aetopoam article

128 which discusses violation of the

missile

article 280 regarding qualified trespass

to dueling

let us discuss their elements so atopong

that the offender is a public officer or

employee

under 128 pero under 218 in a man

the offender is a private person so ibik

sabihin

an isapang distinction no violation of

domicile

trespasser dwelling i in violation of

domicile the offender is

a public officer or employee while in

trespasser dwelling

the offender is a private person now

with respects

article 128 under number one the

offender is a public officer and

employee

tanda under the public officers who may

be liable for crimes

against the fundamental laws are those

who are possessed

of the authority to execute search

warrants and warrants of arrest

ibik sabine hindi llaman basta basta

public officer

you must be a public officer who is

authorized to execute

search warrants and warrants of arrest

and then let us go to the different acts

punished under article 128.

dwelling very specific that he enters

the dwelling of another

against the latter's will peroditos are

128 marami axe

entering any dwelling against the will

of the owner so anka pareholang

article 280i number one entering

any dwelling against the will of the

owner pero mas brodba

ang 128 second and third axe

it is a second searching papers or

effects without the previous consent of

the owner

number three refusing to leave the

premises after having surreptitiously

entered said dwelling and after having

been required to leave the same

coupo details article 280 which is

trespassed

entering the dwelling of another against

the latter's will peroditos

article 128 violation of domicile

merong3

acts una is entering any dwelling

against the will of the owner which is

similar to trespasser dwelling at

meropan additional

second and third acts so it's a

violation of domicile merong taplong axe

peroditiza tres paso dwelling

okay now let's proceed to questions

first question

because of the scorching heat of the sun

the policeman took shelter inside the

house of pedro pedro invited him inside

and offered him a cold beverage maria

the sexy daughter of pedro

gave the beverage to the policeman

pedro asked the policeman to leave

immediately

is the policeman liable under article

128 or

violation of domicile now let's look at

the acts punished under article 128

violation of the missile number one

entering and dwelling against the will

of the owner

pedro against the will of the owner

hinde in fact

beveridge number two searching papers or

effects

without the previous consent of the

owner nandun basi police paramount

searched on papers or effects

number three refusing to leave the

premises after having

surreptitiously entered said dwelling

police pedro the answer is no

in fact

so in other words hindisha under any of

the acts punished

under violation of domicile so an answer

did is

the policeman is not liable under

article 128 next question a policeman

who

without a judicial order enters a

private house

over the owner's opposition is he guilty

of trespass to dwelling so in other

words

over the owner's opposition detoi

guilty by a policeman under trespass to

dwelling so anonymous

pastor dwelling cinema offender so on

offenders at trespasser dwelling i

the offender is a private person or a

private individual

a private individual the answer is no

unpolice i

a public officer so in other words malay

and crime the crime should be

violation of domicile at hindi trespass

dwelling

trespasser dwelling is committed by a

private

individual or a private person last

question

juan enters the dwelling of pedro

against the will of pedro what is the

criminal liability of

one so what is the crim what is the

crime committed when you enter the

dwelling of another

against the will of the owner so putting

violation of domicile under 128

feathering trespasser dwelling under

280.

the answer is if one is a public officer

then the crime committed is violation of

the missile under 128.

if juan is a private individual then his

criminal liability is that of

trespass to dwelling under article 280

okay so before we end this video let us

review what are

the distinctions between violation of

domicile and trespass to dwelling

violation of domicile is under crimes

against the fundamental law of the state

while trespassed to dwelling is under

crimes against personal liberty

and security second this is a violation

of domicile it is committed by

a public officer or employee while in

trespass to dwelling the offender here

is a private person or a private

individual

and then nyopina

and that is he entered the dwelling of

another against

the will of the owner so thank you very

much for watching study hard and pray

harder

thank you