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.