Mastering the drafting of an Information charging a frustrated crime is essential for the Practical Exercises component of the 2026 Bar Examinations. Examinees are frequently required to prepare a complete accusatory portion that properly designates the offense, alleges the ultimate facts showing all acts of execution were performed, and clearly states that the felony was not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator’s will, all while satisfying the sufficiency requirements under Rule 110 of the Rules of Court.
Core Legal Basis and Definition
The primary legal bases are Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code and Sections 6 and 8, Rule 110 of the Rules of Court (Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure).
Article 6, RPC provides:
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
A frustrated felony therefore requires: (1) performance of all acts of execution that would produce the felony; (2) non-production of the felony; and (3) the non-production must be due to causes independent of the will of the offender (e.g., timely and efficacious medical intervention).
Rule 110, Section 6 states that a complaint or information is sufficient if it states: (a) the name of the accused; (b) the designation of the offense given by the statute; (c) the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; (d) the name of the offended party; (e) the approximate date of the commission of the offense; and (f) the place where the offense was committed.
Section 8 further requires that the information shall state the designation of the offense, aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances.
The designation in the caption and body must expressly refer to the frustrated stage, typically phrased as “Frustrated Homicide, defined and penalized under Article 249 in relation to Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code.”
Essential Requisites for a Valid Information Charging a Frustrated Crime
The Information must contain the following in clear, concise, and direct language:
Proper caption and title — “Republic of the Philippines, Regional Trial Court, [Branch], People of the Philippines v. [Accused], Criminal Case No. _____, INFORMATION.”
Designation of the offense — “Frustrated [Homicide/Murder/Parricide/etc.]” with specific reference to the RPC article in relation to Article 6.
Allegation of all acts of execution — Describe the specific overt acts performed by the accused (e.g., “did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously stab the victim with a bladed weapon on the chest and abdomen”).
Intent to kill — Must be expressly alleged for crimes against persons in their frustrated or attempted stages (essential element of frustrated homicide or murder).
Performance of all acts of execution that would have produced the felony — Use language substantially tracking Article 6: “performing all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of Homicide as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce it…”
Independent cause preventing consummation — Must be specifically alleged (e.g., “by reason of the timely and efficacious medical intervention and attendance which prevented the death of the said victim”).
Qualifying and aggravating circumstances (if charging frustrated murder) — Must be alleged with factual averments describing how they attended the commission of the offense, not merely by conclusion (e.g., describe the sudden and unexpected attack from behind while the victim was defenseless to support treachery).
Other standard allegations — Name of offended party, approximate date and place of commission, and “Contrary to law.”
Landmark Supreme Court Doctrines
People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, April 3, 1990 — There is no such crime as frustrated rape under Philippine law. Given the nature, elements, and manner of execution of rape, the frustrated stage is inconceivable; rape is either attempted or consummated upon any penetration, however slight.
In People v. Oliveros (G.R. No. 242552) and similar cases, the Supreme Court upheld Informations for frustrated murder that expressly alleged the accused “performed all the acts of execution which would have produced Murder as a consequence but which, nevertheless did not produce it by reason of competent medical intervention that prevented his death.” This precise allegation apprises the accused of the nature and cause of the accusation.
Qualifying circumstances (treachery, evident premeditation, abuse of superior strength, etc.) must be alleged in the Information with sufficient factual averments to enable a person of common understanding to know what is being charged; merely stating the legal conclusion is insufficient.
Key Exceptions, Qualifications, and Distinctions
Crimes that do not admit of a frustrated stage include rape (per Orita). Formal crimes and crimes where the result is inseparable from the act itself generally do not admit frustrated or attempted stages.
Distinctions among stages of execution (frequently tested):
| Stage | Acts of Execution Performed | Result Produced? | Cause of Non-Production | Example in Homicide/Murder |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Attempted | Not all (overt acts only) | No | Intervention before completion | Stabs but is disarmed before inflicting mortal wound |
| Frustrated | All | No | Independent of offender’s will | Inflicts mortal wounds; victim survives due to prompt surgery |
| Consummated | All | Yes | N/A | Victim dies from the wounds |
Important distinctions from related concepts:
- If there is no intent to kill, the proper charge is serious physical injuries (consummated), not frustrated homicide.
- “Serious physical injuries” or “near death” language is insufficient; the Information must link the acts to the potential production of death but for an independent cause.
- For frustrated murder, failure to allege and describe a qualifying circumstance limits conviction to frustrated homicide even if evidence shows the circumstance.
How This Topic Appears in Bar Essay Questions
Bar examiners commonly present a fact pattern involving a stabbing or shooting in a vital area, immediate medical treatment, and survival of the victim. The task is usually: “Draft the appropriate Information for Frustrated Homicide [or Murder].” Less frequently, they may ask to critique a defective draft or determine the correct stage and proper designation.
Common pitfalls:
- Omitting the Article 6 “all acts of execution… but nevertheless did not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will” clause.
- Failing to allege intent to kill.
- Using vague or conclusionary language for the independent cause or qualifying circumstances.
- Charging frustrated murder without alleging and describing any qualifying circumstance.
- Drafting only the body without the required caption, title, and “Contrary to law” closing.
Best answer structure: (1) Briefly state the applicable rule (Art. 6 + Rule 110); (2) identify the crime and stage from the facts; (3) draft the complete Information using precise codal language; (4) explain why each key allegation is necessary.
Practical Application Tips and Memory Aids
Memory aid for the frustrated stage (ARI):
All acts of execution performed; Result not produced; due to Independent cause.
Drafting template for the accusatory portion (Frustrated Homicide):
That on or about [date], in [place], within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with intent to kill and armed with a bladed weapon, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously stab [victim] on the chest, thereby performing all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of Homicide as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce it by reason of the timely and efficacious medical intervention and attendance which prevented the death of said [victim], to the damage and prejudice of the latter.
For frustrated murder, insert the qualifying circumstance with factual description immediately after the acts (e.g., “with treachery, the accused suddenly and unexpectedly attacked the victim from behind while the latter was defenseless…”).
Always verify that the independent cause alleged (medical intervention, bulletproof vest, misfire, police arrival, etc.) is truly independent of the offender’s will.
Key Takeaways
- Every valid Information for a frustrated crime must expressly allege all three elements of Article 6: performance of all acts of execution, non-production of the felony, and an independent cause.
- Use language that substantially tracks Article 6 in the body of the Information.
- Intent to kill must be alleged for frustrated homicide or murder.
- Qualifying circumstances for frustrated murder require factual averments, not mere conclusions.
- There is no frustrated rape under Philippine jurisprudence (People v. Orita).
- The Information must enable the accused to prepare a defense and the court to render judgment; sufficiency is tested by the allegations, not by evidence.
- In Practical Exercises, always produce a complete document with proper caption, designation citing the RPC articles in relation to Article 6, detailed acts, independent cause, and “Contrary to law.”
Internalize these requisites and the model language. They are the exact tools needed to score high on any essay or drafting question involving frustrated crimes in the 2026 Bar.