Crim Law Mem Aid

8/22/2019 Crim Law Mem Aid

1/47

PAGE 41

MEMORYAIDIN CRIMINAL LAW


2/47

PAGE 41

CRIMINAL LAW - that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treatsof their nature and provides for their punishment.

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW

1 1 GENERAL - it is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in thePhilippine territory (Art. 14, NCC)EXCEPTIONS:

1 1 Treaty stipulations

1 1 Laws of preferential application

1 1 Principles of Public International Law.The following persons are exempted:

a. Sovereigns and other chief of stateb. Ambassadors,ministers, plenipotentiary, minister resident

and charges daffaires.

Consuls, vice-consuls and other commercial representatives of foreignnation cannot claim the privileges and immunities accorded toambassadors and ministers.

1 1 TERRITORIAL penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable onlywithin its territory.EXCEPTIONS: (Art. 2, RPC)i.e., enforceable even outside

Philippine territory.1) Offense committed while on a Philippine ship or airship2) Forging or counterfeiting any coin or currency note of the Philippines

or obligations and securities issued by the Government.3) Introduction into the country of the above-mentioned obligations and

securities.4) While being public officers or employees should commit an offense in

the exercise of their functions.5) Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the

law of nations defined in Title One of Book Two.EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: Penal laws not applicablewithin or without Philippine territory if so provided in treaties and laws ofpreferential application. (Art.2, RPC)

1 1 PROSPECTIVEGENERAL RULE: Penal laws cannot make an act punishable in amanner in which it was not punishable when committed.EXCEPTION: (it may be applied retroactively) When the new law isfavorable to the accused.EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTIONa) The new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or

existing causes of actions.

b) Offender is a habitual criminal.LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER OF CONGRESS TO ENACT PENALLAWS:1. No ex post facto law shall be enacted2. No bill of attainder shall be enacted3. No law that violates equal protection clause of the constitution shall be

enacted4. No law which imposes cruel and unusual punishments nor excessive

fines shall be enacted.

THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW1. Classical Theory - basis of criminal liability is human free will. Under this

theory, the purpose of penalty is retribution. The RPC is generallygoverned by this theory.

2. Positivist Theory basis of criminal liability is the sum of the social andeconomic phenomena to which the actor is exposed wherein preventionand correction is the purpose of penalty. This theory is exemplified in theprovisions regarding impossible crimes and habitual delinquency.

3. Eclectic or MixedTheory combination of positivist and classical thinkingwherein crimes that are economic and social in nature should be dealt ina positive manner; thus, the law is more compassionate.

PRELIMINARY TITLE

ART. 2 APPLICATION OF ITS PROVISIONS

RULES ON VESSELS:1.) Philippine vessel or aircraft.

Must be understood as that which is registered in the Philippine Bureau

of Customs.

2.) On Foreign Merchant Vessels

ENGLISH RULE: Crimes committed aboard a vessel within the territorialwaters of a country are triable in the courts of such country.EXCEPTION: When the crimes merely affect things within the vessel orwhen they only refer to the internal management thereof.

FRENCH RULE:GENERAL RULE: Crimes committed aboard vessel within the territorialwaters of a country are not triable in the courts of said country.EXCEPTION: When their commission affects the peace and security of

the territory or when the safety of the state is endangered.


3/47

PAGE 41


In the Philippines, we follow the English Rule.

In the case of a foreign warship, the same is not subject to territoriallaws.

TITLE ONE: FELONIES AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECTCRIMINAL LIABILITY

Chapter One: Felonies (Arts. 3-10)

ART. 3 FELONIES

Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC.

ELEMENTS OF FELONIES (GENERAL)1. there must be an act or omission ie, there must be external acts.2. the act or omission must be punishable by the RPC.

3. the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa.

NULLUM CRIMEN, NULLA POENA SINE LEGE - there is no crime wherethere is no law punishing it.

CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES ACCORDING TO THE MEANS BYWHICH THEY ARE COMMITTED:

1. Intentional Felonies the act is performed with deliberate intent ormalice.Requisites of DOLO or MALICE:

a. Freedom

b. Intelligencec. Criminal Intent

Mistake of Fact is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the personcausing injury to another. Such person is not criminally liable as he actedwithout criminal intent.

Requisites of mistake of fact as a defense:a. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been

as the accused believed them to be.b. That the intention of the accused in performing the act

should be lawful.

c. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness onthe part of the accused.

2. Culpable Felonies - performed without malice.Requisites of CULPA:

a. Freedomb. Intelligencec. Negligence and Imprudence

REASON FOR PUNSHING ACTS OF NEGLIGENCE: A man must usecommon sense and exercise due reflection in all his acts; it is his duty tobe cautious, careful and prudent.

Mala Prohibita - the class of crimes punishable by SPECIAL LAWS andwhere criminal intent is not, as a rule, necessary, it being sufficient that theoffender has the intent to perpetrate the act prohibited by the special law.

MALA IN SE vs. MALA PROHIBITA

MALA IN SE

MALA

PROHIBITA1. As tomoraltrait oftheoffender

The moral traitis considered.Liabil ity wi llarise only whenthere is dolo orculpa.

The moral traitof the offenderis notconsidered. Itis enough thatthe prohibitedact wasvoluntarilydone.

2. As touse of

goodfaith asadefense

Good faith orlack of criminal

intent is a validdefense; unlessthe crime is theresult of culpa.

Good faith isnot a defense.

3. As todegreeofaccom-plish-ment ofthecrime

The degree ofaccomplishmentof the crime istaken intoaccount inpunishing theoffender.

The act givesrise to a crimeonly when it isconsummated.


4/47

PAGE 41

4. As tomitigating andaggravatingcircum-stances

Mitigating andaggravatingcircumstancesare taken intoaccount inimposing thepenalty.

Mitigating andaggravatingcircumstancesare generallynot taken intoaccount.

5. As todegreeofpartici-pation

When there ismore than oneoffender, thedegree of participation ofeach in thecommission ofthe crime istaken intoaccount.

Degree of participation isgenerally nottaken intoaccount. Allwhoparticipated inthe act arepunished to thesame extent.

6. As towhatlaws are

violated

Violation of theRPC (Generalrule)

Violation ofSpecial Laws(General rule)

Intent distinguished from Motive

INTENT MOTIVE1. Is the purpose touse a part icularmeans to effect suchresult

1. Is the movingpower which impelsone to act

2. Is an element ofthe crime, except inunintentionalfelonies (culpable)

2. Is NOT anelement of the crime

3. Is essential inintentional felonies

3. Is essential onlywhen the identity ofthe perpetrator is indoubt

ART. 4 CRIMINAL LIABILITY

PAR. 1 - Criminal Liability for a felony different from that intended to becommitted

REQUISITES:

11 That an intentional felony has been committed.

11 That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural andlogical consequence of the felony committed.

PROXIMATE CAUSE that cause, which, in the natural and continuoussequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injurywithout which the result would not have occurred.

Thus, the person is still criminally liable in:1. Error in personae- mistake in the identity of the victim.2. Abberatio ictus mistake in the blow.3. Praeter intentionem lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.

PAR. 2 (IMPOSSIBLE CRIME)REQUISITES:a) That the act performed would be an offense against persons or property.b) That the act was done with evil intent.c) That its accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that the means

employed is either inadequate or ineffectual.d) That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another

provision of the RPC.

ART. 6 CONSUMMATED, FRUSTRATED & ATTEMPTEDFELONIES

STAGES OF EXECUTION:1. CONSUMMATED FELONY

When all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishmentare present.

2. FRUSTRATED FELONY

ELEMENTS:11 The offender performs all the acts of execution.

11 All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence.

11 But the felony is not produced.

1 1 By the reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

WHAT CRIMES DO NOT ADMIT OF FRUSTRATED STAGE?1) Rape2) Bribery3) Corruption of Public Officers4) Adultery5) Physical Injury


5/47

PAGE 41


3. ATTEMPTED FELONYELEMENTS:a) The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt

acts.b) He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the

felony.

c) The offenders acts are not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance.

DESISTANCE - is an absolutory cause which negates criminal liabilitybecause the law encourages a person to desist from committing a crime.

- this is applicable only in the attempted stage.

OVERT ACTS Some physical activity or deed, indicating intention tocommit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, whichif carried to its complete termination following its natural course, without

being frustrated by external obstacles, nor by voluntary desistance of theperpetrator will logically ripen into a concrete offense.

INDETERMINATE OFFENSE: One where the purpose of the offender inperforming an act is not certain. The accused maybe convicted for a felonydefined by the acts performed by him up to the time of desistance.

2 STAGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME:1) Internal acts

Such as mere ideas in the mind of person.

Not punishable.2) External acts cover:

a) Preparatory acts - ordinarily not punished except when consideredby law as independent crimes (e.g. Art. 304, Possession of picklocksand similar tools)

b) Acts of Execution - punishable under the RPC

ART. 7 LIGHT FELONIES

Light Felonies are punishable only when they have been consummatedEXCEPT: If committed against persons or property, punishable even ifnot consummated.

Only principals and accomplices are liable, accessories are not liable

even if committed against persons or property.

ART. 8 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT FELONY

REQUISITES OF CONSPIRACY

11 That 2 or more persons came to an agreement.

11 That the agreement pertains to the commission of a felony.1 1 That the execution of the felony was decided upon.

2 CONCEPTS OF CONSPIRACY

11 Conspiracy as a crime by itself.EXAMPLE: conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection, treason,sedition.

11 Conspiracy as a means of committing a crime

11 There is a previous and express agreement;

11 The participants acted in concert or simultaneously which isindicative of a meeting of the minds towards a common criminalobjective. There is an impliedagreement.

GENERAL RULE: Mere conspiracy or proposal to commit a felony is notpunishable since they are only preparatory actsEXCEPTION: in cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor,such as in treason, coup detat, and rebellion or insurrection

The act of one is the act of allGENERAL RULE: When conspiracy is established, all who participatedtherein, irrespective of the quantity or quality of his participation is liableequally, whether conspiracy is pre-planned or instantaneous. EXCEPTION:Unless one or some of the conspirators committed some other crime which isnot part of the intended crime.

EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: When the act constitutes a singleindivisible offense.

Conspiracy may be inferred when two or more persons proceed toperform overt acts towards the accomplishment of the same feloniousobjective, with each doing his act, so that their acts though seeminglyindependent were in fact connected, showing a common design.

These overt acts must consist of:- active participation in the actual commission of the crime itself, or- moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the time ofthe commission of the crime, or


6/47

PAGE 41

- exerting a moral ascendance over the other co-conspirators by movingthem to execute or implement the criminal plan (PEOPLE vs. ABUT, etal., GR No. 137601, April 24, 2003)

REQUISITES OF PROPOSAL:1. That a person has decidedto commit a felony; and2. That heproposes its execution to some other person or persons.

ART. 9 CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES ACCORDING TO GRAVITY

Importance of Classification1. To determine whether these felonies can be complexed or not.2. To determine the prescription of the crime and the prescription of the

penalty.

Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishmentor penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art.25 of the Code.

Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penaltieswhich in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 ofthe Code.

Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which thepenalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both, isprovided.

ART. 10 OFFENSES NOT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THERPC

GENERAL RULE: RPC provisions are supplementary to special laws.EXCEPTION:1. Where the special law provides otherwise; and2. When the provisions of the RPC are impossible of application, either by

express provision or by necessary implication.

Thus, when the special law adopts the penalties imposed in the RPC, suchas reclusin perpetua or reclusin temporal, the provisions of the RPC onimposition of penalties based on stage of execution, degree of participation,

and attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances may be appliedby necessary implication.

Chapter Two: Justifying Circumstances and Circumstances WhichExempt from Criminal Liability (Arts. 11-12)

ART. 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES are those where the act of a person issaid to be in accordance with law, so that such person is deemed not to havetransgressed the law and is free from both criminal and civil liability. There isno civil liability, except in par. 4 of Art. 11, where the civil liability is borne bythe persons benefited by the act.

1. SELF- DEFENSE

REQUISITES:

1 1 Unlawful aggression (condition sine qua non);

11 Reasonable necessityof the means employed to prevent or repel it; and11 Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending

himself.

UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION- is equivalent to an actual physical assault or, at least- threatened assault of an immediate and imminent kind which is

offensive and positively strong, showing the wrongful intent to cause injury.

TEST OF REASONABLENESS the means employed depends upon thenature and quality of the (1) weapon used by the aggressor, and (2) hisphysical condition, character, size and other circumstances, (3) and those ofthe person defending himself, (4) and also the place and occasion of theassault.

Perfect equality between the weapons used by the one defending himselfand that of the aggressor is not required, nor material commensurabilitybetween the means of attack and defense.REASON: Because the person assaulted does not have sufficient

tranquility of mind to think and to calculate.


7/47

PAGE 41


Rights included in self-defense:Self-defense includes not only the defense of the person or body of the oneassaulted but also that of his rights, the enjoyment of which is protected bylaw. Thus, it includes:

1. The right to honor. Hence, a slap on the face is considered as unlawfulaggression directed against the honor of the actor (People vs. Sabio, 19SCRA 901).

2. The defense of property rights, only if there is also an actual andimminent danger on the person of the one defending ( People vsNarvaez, 121 SCRA 389).

Stand ground when in the right - the law does not require a person toretreat when his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadlyweapon.

UnderRepublic Act 9262, known as the Anti- Violence against Women

and their Children Act of 2004:Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering fromBattered Woman Syndrome do not incur any criminal or civil liabilitynotwithstanding the absence of any of the elements for justifyingcircumstances of self-defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26, R.A. No. 9262) Thelaw provides for an additional justifying circumstance.

Battered Woman Syndrome refers to a scientifically defined patternof psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in batteringrelationships as a result of cumulative abuse.

Battery refers to any act of inflicting physical harm upon the womanor her child resulting to physical and psychological or emotional distress.

2. DEFENSE OF RELATIVES

REQUISITES:1. Unlawful Aggression;2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;

and3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one

making the defense had no part therein.

RELATIVES THAT CAN BE DEFENDED:1. Spouse2. Ascendants3. Descendants

4. Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinityin the same degrees.

5. Relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree.

3. DEFENSE OF STRANGER

REQUISITES:1. Unlawful Aggression;2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and3. The person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or other

evil motive.4. AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR INJURY

REQUISITES:1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists:2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; and3. There be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.

No civil liability except when there is another person benefited in whichcase the latter is the one liable.

Greater evil must not be brought about by the negligence or imprudenceor violation of law by the actor.

5. FULFILLMENT OF DUTY; OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT OROFFICE.

REQUISITES:1. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful

exercise of a right or office;

2. That the injury caused or the offense committed be the necessaryconsequence of the due performance of duty or the lawful exercise ofsuch right or office.

6. OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE.

REQUISITES:1. That an order has been issued by a superior.2. That such order must be for some lawful purpose3. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is

lawful.


8/47

PAGE 41

Subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order if he is not awareof its illegality and he is not negligent.

ART. 12. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

Exempting Circumstances (or the circumstances for non-imputability)

are those grounds for exemption from punishment, because there is wantingin the agent of the crime any of the conditions which makes the act voluntary,or negligent.

BASIS:The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence ofintelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the absence of negligence onthe part of the accused.

JUSTIFYINGCIRCUMSTANCE

EXEMPTINGCIRCUMSTANCE

1. It affects the act

not the actor.

1. It affects the actor

not the act.2. The act isconsidered to havebeen done within thebounds of law;hence, legitimate andlawful in the eyes ofthe law.

2. The actcomplained of isactually wrongful, butthe actor is not liable.

3. Since the act isconsidered lawful,there is no crime.

3. Since the actcomplained of isactually wrong thereis a crime but sincethe actor acted

without voluntariness,there is no dolo norculpa

4. Since there is nocrime, nor a criminal,there is also nocriminal or civi lliability. (except Art.11, par. 4)

4. Since there is acrime committedthough there is nocriminal, there is civilliability.

1. IMBECILITY OR INSANITY

Insanity or imbecility exists when there is a complete deprivation ofintelligence or freedom of the will.

An insane person is not so exempt if it can be shown that he actedduring a lucid interval. But an imbecile is exempt in all cases fromcriminal liability.

TWO TESTS OF INSANITY:1. Test of COGNITION complete deprivation of intelligence in

committing the crime.2. Test of VOLITION total deprivation of freedom of will.

The defense must prove that the accused was insane at the time of thecommission of the crime because the presumption is always in favor ofsanity.

Insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of intelligence incommitting the act. Mere abnormality of the mental faculties will notexclude imputability. The accused must be "so insane as to be incapableof entertaining criminal intent." He must be deprived of reason and acting

without the least discernment because there is a complete absence ofthe power to discern or a total deprivation of freedom of the will.(PEOPLE vs. ANTONIO, GR No. 144266, November 27, 2002)

2. PERSON UNDER NINE YEARS OF AGE

An infant under the age of nine years is absolutely and conclusivelypresumed to be incapable of committing a crime.

The phrase under nine years should be construed nine years or less

3. PERSON OVER NINE YEARS OF AGE AND UNDER 15 ACTING

WITHOUT DISCERNMENT.

Must have acted without discernment.

DISCERNMENT mental capacity to fully appreciate the consequences ofan unlawful act.Discernment maybe shown by:a) The manner the crime was committed: orb) The conduct of the offender after its commission.

4. ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF CAUSING IT

Basis: Lack of negligence or intent.


9/47

PAGE 41


ELEMENTS:1. A person is performing a lawful act;2. With due care;3. He causes injury to another by mere accident;4. Without fault or intention of causing it.

5. A PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER THE COMPULSION OF ANIRRESISTABLE FORCE

ELEMENTS:1. That the compulsion is by means of physical force.2. That the physical force must be irresistable.3. That the physical force must come from a third person.

Basis: complete absence of freedom or voluntariness.

The force must be so irresistable as to reduce the actor to a mere

instrument who act not only without will but against his will.

6. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

ELEMENTS:1. That the threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater than, or at least

equal to, that which he is required to commit;2. That it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man

would have succumbed to it.

Duress as a valid defense should be based on real, imminent, orreasonable fear for ones life or limb and should not be speculative,

fanciful, or remote fear.

ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS An act doneby me against my will is not my act.

7. INSUPERABLE CAUSE.

INSUPERABLE CAUSE some motive which has lawfully, morally orphysically prevented a person to do what the law commands.

ELEMENTS:1. That an act is required by law to be done.

2. That a person fails to perform such act.

3. That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful orinsuperable cause.

Examples:a. The municipal president detained the offended party for three days

because to take him to the nearest justice of the peace required a

journey for three days by boat as there was no other means oftransportation. (US vs. Vicentillo, 19 Phil. 118)The distance which required a journey for three days was considered

an insuperable cause.Note: Under the law, the person arrested must be delivered to thenearest judicial authority at most within 18 hours (now 36 hours, Art. 125RPC); otherwise, the public officer will be liable for arbitrary detention.

b. A mother who at the time of childbirth was overcome by severe dizzinessand extreme debility, and left the child in a thicket were said child died, isnot liable for infanticide because it was physically impossible for her totake home the child. (People vs. Bandian, 63 Phil. 530).

The severe dizziness and extreme debility of the woman constitutean insuperable cause.

ABSOLUTORY CAUSES - are those where the act committed is a crime butfor reasons of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.

Other absolutory causes:1. Spontaneous desistance (Art. 6)2. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability (Art. 20)3. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances (Art.

247)4. Persons exempt from criminal liability for theft, swindling and malicious

mischief (Art. 332)5. Instigation

Entrapment is NOT an absolutory cause. A buy-bust operationconducted in connection with illegal drug-related offenses is a form ofentrapment.

ENTRAPMENT INSTIGATION


10/47

PAGE 41

1. Ways andmeans areresorted to for thecapture of lawbreaker in theexecution of hiscriminal plan.

1. Instigator inducesthe would-beaccused to committhe crime, hence hebecomes a co-principal.

2. not a bar to theprosecution andconviction of thelawbreaker

2. it will result in theacqui ttal of theaccused.

Chapter Three: Circumstances Which Mitigate Criminal Liability

ART.13 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES those which if present in the commissionof the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability but serve onlyto reduce the penalty.

One single fact cannot be made the basis of more than one mitigatingcircumstance. Hence, a mitigating circumstance arising from a singlefact, absorbs all the other mitigating circumstances arising from the samefact.

BASIS : Diminution of either freedom of action intelligence or intent or on thelesser perversity of the offender.

CLASSES

ORDINARY

PRIVILEGED

Source Subsections1-10 of Art.13 (RPC)

Arts. 68, 69and 64 of RPC

As to theeffect

If not offset(by anaggravatingcircumstance) it willoperate tohave thepenaltyimposed atits minimumperiod,

provided the

It operates toreduce thepenalty byone to twodegreesdependingupon whatthe lawprovides

penalty is adivisible one

As to offset May beoffset byaggravatingcircums-tance

Cannot beoffset

1. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

Applies, when all the requisites necessary to justify the act are notattendant.

But in the case of incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives, anddefense of a stranger, unlawful aggression must be present, it being anindispensable requisite.

2. UNDER 18, OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD

It is the age of the accused at the time of the commission of the crimewhich should be determined. His age at the time of the trial isimmaterial.

Legal effects of various ages of offender1. Nine (9) years of age and below exempting circumstance. (Art. 12,

par. 2)2. Over 9 but not more than 15 exempting unless, he acted with

discernment in which case penalty is reduced to at least two (2)degrees lower than that imposed. (Art. 12, par. 3; Art. 68, par. 1)

3. Above 15 but under 18 - regardless of discernment, penalty is reducedby one (1) degree lower than that imposed. (Art. 68 par. 2)

4. Minor delinquent under 18 years of age, sentence suspended (Art. 192,PD 603 as amended by PD 1179)

5. 18 years or over full criminal responsibility.6. 70 years or over mitigating, no imposition of death penalty; if already

imposed, execution of death penalty is suspended and commuted.

BASIS: diminution of intelligence

3. NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG

Rule for the application:Can be taken into account only when the facts proven show that there is anotable and evident disproportion between the means employed to executethe criminal act and its consequences.


11/47

PAGE 41


Intention may be ascertained by considering:a) the weapon usedb) the part of the body injuredc) the injury inflicted

BASIS : intent is diminished

4. PROVOCATION OR THREAT

PROVOCATION any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offendedparty, capable of exciting, inciting or irritating any one.

REQUISITES:1. The provocation must be sufficient.2. It must originate from the offended party.3. The provocation must be immediate to the commission of the crime by

the person who is provoked.

The threat should not be offensive and positively strong. Otherwise, thethreat to inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression, which may give riseto self-defense.

5. VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE

REQUISITES:1. That there be a grave offense done to the one committing the felony, his

spouse, ascendants; descendants, legitimate, natural or adoptedbrothers or sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degrees;

2. That the felony is committed in immediate vindication of such graveoffense.

Immediate allows for a lapse of time unlike in sufficient provocation, aslong as the offender is still suffering from the mental agony brought aboutby the offense to him.

PROVOCATION VINDICATION1. It is made directlyonly to the personcommitting thefelony.

1. The graveof fense may becommitted alsoagainst theoffenders relativesmentioned by law.

2. The cause thatbrought about theprovocation neednot be a graveoffense.

2. The offendedparty must havedone a grave offenseto the offender or hisrelatives mentionedby law.

3. It is necessarythat the provocationor threatimmediatelypreceded the act.

3. The vindication ofthe grave offensemay be proximate,which admits of anINTERVAL of time.

5. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION

It requires that:1. The accused acted upon an impulse.2. The impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produced passion or

obfuscation in him.

REQUISITES:1. That there be an act, both unlawful and sufficient to produce such a

condition of mind;2. That said act which produced the obfuscation was not far removed from

the commission of the crime by a considerable length of time, duringwhich the perpetrator might recover his normal equanimity.

A mitigating circumstance only when the same arose from lawfulsentiments.

BASIS: Loss of reasoning and self-control, thereby diminishing the

exercise of his will power.

WHEN PASSION OR OBFUSCATION NOT MITIGATING: Whencommitted:

1. In the spirit of lawlessness, or2. In a spirit of revenge

PASSION/OBFUSCATION

PROVOCATION

- produced by animpulse which maybe caused byprovocation

- the provocationcomes from theinjured party.


12/47

PAGE 41

- the offense neednot be immediate. Itis only required thatthe influence thereoflasts until themoment the crime iscommitted

-must immediatelyprecede thecommission of thecrime.

7. SURRENDER AND CONFESSION OF GUILT

REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER:1. That the offender had not been actually arrested;2. That the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the

latters agent;3. That the surrender was voluntary.

WHEN SURRENDER VOLUNTARYA surrender to be voluntary must be spontaneous, showing the intent of theaccused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities, either because:1. he acknowledges his guilt; or

2. he wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred inhis search and capture.

REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY PLEA OF GUILTY:

11 That the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt.

11 That the confession of guilt was made in open court, that is, before thecompetent court that is to try the case; and

11 That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation ofevidence for the prosecution.

BASIS: lesser perversity of the offender.

8. PHYSICAL DEFECT OF OFFENDER

When the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from somephysical defect, restricting his means of action, defense or communicationwith others.

The physical defect must relate to the offense committed.

BASIS: diminution of element of voluntariness.

9. ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER

REQUISITES:1. That the illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-

power.2. That such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his

acts.

Includes illness of the mind not amounting to insanity.

BASIS: diminution of intelligence and intent.

10. SIMILAR AND ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES

EXAMPLES:1) Impulse of jealousy, similar to passion and obfuscation.2) Testifying for the prosecution, analogous to plea of guilty

Chapter Four: Circumstances which Aggravate Criminal Liability (Art.14)

Aggravating circumstances are those which, if attendant in thecommission of the crime, serve to have the penalty imposed in its maximumperiod provided by law for the offense or change the nature of the crime.

BASIS:They are based on the greater perversity of the offender manifested in thecommission of the felony as shown by:1. the motivating power itself,2. the place of the commission,

3. the means and ways employed4. the time, or5. the personal circumstances of the offender, or the offended party.

KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:

1. Generic those which apply to all crimes, such as:

a) Advantage taken of public position;

b) Contempt or insult of public authorities;

c) Crime committed in the dwelling of the offended party;

d) Abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness;

e) Place where crime is committed;

f) Nighttime, uninhabited place, or band;


13/47

PAGE 41


g) Recidivism (reincidencia);

h) Habituality (reiteracion);

i) Craft, fraud or disguise;

j) Unlawful entry;

k) Breaking of parts of the house;

l) Use of persons under 15 years of age.

2. Specific those which apply only to specific crimes, such as ignominy incrimes against chastity and cruelty and treachery which are applicableonly to crimes against persons.

a) Disregard of rank, age or sex due the offended party;

b) Abuse of superior strength or means be employed to weaken the

defense;

c) Treachery (alevosia);

d) Ignominy;

e) Cruelty;

f) Use of unlicensed firearm in the murder or homicide committed

therewith (RA 8294).

3. Qualifying those that change the nature of the crime.

Alevosia (treachery) or evident premeditation qualifies the killing of a

person to murder.

Art. 248 enumerates the qualifying aggravating circumstances which

quality the killing of person to murder.

4. Inherent those which of necessity accompany the commission of thecrime, therefore not considered in increasing the penalty to be imposed,

such as:a) Evident premeditation in robbery, theft, estafa, adultery and

concubinage;

b) Abuse of public office in bribery;

c) Breaking of a wall or unlawful entry into a house in robbery with the

use of force upon things;

d) Fraud in estafa;

e) Deceit in simple seduction;

f) Ignominy in rape.

5. Special those which arise under special conditions to increase thepenalty of the offense and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstances,such as:

a) Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160);

b) Complex crimes (Art. 48);

c) Error in personae (Art. 49);

d) Taking advantage of public position and membership in anorganized/syndicated crime group (Par.1[a], Art. 62).

GENERICAGGRAVATING

CIRCUMSTANCE

QUALIFYINGAGGRAVATING

CIRCUMSTANCE

As to its effectIncreases the penaltywhich should beimposed upon theaccused to themaximum period butwithout exceeding

the limit prescribedby law.

To give the crime itsproper and exclusivename and to placethe author thereof insuch a situation as todeserve no other

penalty than thatspecially prescribedby law for said crime.

As to whether it can be offset by amitigating circumstance

May be offset by amitigatingcircumstance.

Cannot be offset by amitigatingcircumstance

RULES ON AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES1. Aggravating circumstances shall not be appreciated if:

a) They constitute a crime specially punishable by law, orb) They are included by the law in defining a crime and prescribing a

penalty therefor, shall not be taken into account for the purpose ofincreasing the penalty.

EXAMPLE: That the crime be committed by means of fire,explosion (Art. 14, par. 12) is in itself a crime of arson (Art. 321) or acrime involving destruction (Art. 324). It is not to be considered toincrease the penalty for the crime of arson or for the crime involvingdestruction.

2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstanceinherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessityaccompany the commission thereof. (Art. 62, par. 2)


14/47

PAGE 41

3. Aggravating circumstances which arise:a) From the moral attributes of the offender, orb) From his private relations with the offended party, orc) From any personal cause,shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the principals, accomplicesand accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. (Art. 62,

par. 3)

4. The circumstances which consista) In the material execution of the act, orb) In the means employed to accomplish it,

shall serve to aggravate the liability of those persons only who hadknowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or theircooperation therein. Except when there is proof of conspiracy in whichcase the act of one is deemed to be the act of all, regardless of lack ofknowledge of the facts constituting the circumstance. (Art. 62, par. 4)

5. Aggravating circumstances, regardless of its kind, should be specificallyalleged in the information AND proved as fully as the crime itself in orderto increase the penalty. (Sec. 9, Rule 110, 2000 Rules of CriminalProcedure)

6. When there is more than one qualifying aggravating circumstancepresent, one of them will be appreciated as qualifying aggravating whilethe others will be considered as generic aggravating.

ART. 14 AGGRAVATINGCIRCUMSTANCES

Par. 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.

Applicable only when the offender is a public officer.

The offender must have abused his public position or at least use of the

same facilitated the commission of the offense. This circumstance cannot be taken into consideration in offenses where

taking advantage of official position is made by law an integral elementofthe crime, such as in malversation under Art. 217, or in falsification of adocument committed by public officers under Art. 171.

Taking advantage of a public position is also inherent in the case ofaccessories under Art. 19, par. 3 (harboring, concealing, or assisting inthe escape of the principal of the crime), and in crimes committed bypublic officers (Arts. 204-245).

Par. 2 That the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the

public authorities.

REQUISITES OF THIS CIRCUMSTANCE:1. That the public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions.2. That he who is thus engaged in the exercise of said functions is not the

person against whom the crime is committed.3. The offender knows him to be a public authority.4. His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the

criminal act.

Public authority sometimes also called a person in authority, is a publicofficer who is directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who hasthe power to govern and execute the laws; like a mayor, councilor, governor,barangay captain and barangay chairman.

A teacher or professor of a public or recognized private school is not apublic authority within the contemplation of this paragraph. While he is aperson in authority under Art. 152, that status is only for purposes of Art.148 (direct assault) and Art. 152 (resistance and disobedience).

Par. 3 That the act be committed(1) with insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended

party on account of his (a) rank, (b) age, or (c) sex, or(2) that it be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if

the latter has not given provocation.

The four circumstances enumerated should be considered as oneaggravating circumstance only.

Disregard of rank, age or sex is essentially applicable only to crimesagainst person or honor. They are not taken into account in crimesagainst property.

To be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance, there must be

evidence that in the commission of the crime, the offender deliberatelyintended to offend or insult the sex, age and rank of the offended party.

Rank of the offended party is the designation or title of distinction used tofix the relative position of the offended party in reference to others.

- there must be a difference in the social condition of the offenderand the offended party.

Age of the offended party may refer to old age or the tender age of thevictim.

Sexof the offended party refers to the female sex, not to the male sex.


15/47

PAGE 41


THE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF DISREGARD OF RANK, AGE,OR SEX IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:1. When the offender acted with passion and obfuscation.2. When there exists a relationship between the offended party and the

offender.3. When the condition of being a woman is indispensable in the commission

of the crime. (e.g. in parricide, abduction, seduction and rape)

Disregard of sex and age are not absorbed in treachery becausetreachery refers to the manner of the commission of the crime, whiledisregard of sex and age pertains to the relationship of the victim(People vs. Lapaz, March 31, 1989).

Dwelling must be a building or structure, exclusively used for rest andcomfort. A combination of a house and a store or a market stall where thevictim slept is not a dwelling.

- dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of the staircase andenclosure under the house.

The aggravating circumstance of dwelling requires that the crime bewholly or partly committed therein or in any integral part thereof.

Dwelling does not mean the permanent residence or domicile of theoffended party or that he must be the owner thereof. He must, however,be actually living or dwelling therein even for a temporary duration orpurpose.

It is not necessary that the accused should have actually entered thedwelling of the victim to commit the offense; it is enough that the victimwas attacked inside his own house, although the assailant may havedevised means to perpetrate the assault from without.

WHAT AGGRAVATES THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME IN ONESDWELLING:1. The abuse of confidence which the offended party reposed in the

offender by opening the door to him; or2. The violation of the sanctity of the home by trespassing therein with

violence or against the will of the owner.

MEANING OF PROVOCATION IN THE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCEOF DWELLING:The provocation must be:1. Given by the owner of the dwelling,

2. Sufficient, and

3. Immediate to the commission of the crime.

If all these conditions are present, the offended party is deemed to havegiven the provocation, and the fact that the crime is committed in thedwelling of the offended party is not an aggravating circumstance.REASON: When it is the offended party who has provoked the incident,

he loses his right to the respect and consideration due him in his ownhouse.

DWELLING IS NOT AGGRAVATING IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:1. When both the offender and the offended party are occupants of the

same house, and this is true even if offender is a servant in the house.

EXCEPTION: In case of adultery in the conjugal dwelling, the sameis aggravating. However, if the paramour also dwells in the conjugaldwelling, the applicable aggravating circumstance is abuse ofconfidence.

2. When robbery is committed by the use offorce upon things, dwelling is

not aggravating because it is inherent. But dwelling is aggravating in robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons because this class of robbery can becommitted without the necessity of trespassing the sanctity of theoffended partys house.

3. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent or included by law in

defining the crime.

4. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediateprovocation.

There must exist a close relation between the provocation made by

the victim and the commission of the crime by the accused.

5. The victim is not a dweller of the house.

Par. 4. That the act be committed with(1) abuse of confidence or(2) obvious ungratefulness.

Par. 4 provides two aggravating circumstances which, if present in thesame case and must be independently appreciated.

While one may be related to the other in the factual situation in the case,they cannot be lumped together as abuse of confidence requires a


16/47

PAGE 41

special confidential relationship between the offender and the victim, butthis is not so in ungratefulness.

REQUISITES OF ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE:1. That the offended party had trusted the offender.2. That the offenderabusedsuch trust by committing a crime against the

offended party.3. That the abuse of confidence facilitatedthe commission of the crime.

Abuse of confidence is inherent in malversation (Art. 217), qualified theft(Art. 310), estafa by conversion or misappropriation (Art. 315), andqualified seduction (Art. 337).

REQUISITES OF OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS1. That the offended party had trusted the offender;2. That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the

offended party.3. That the act be committed with obvious ungratefulness.

The ungratefulness contemplated by par. 4 must be such clear andmanifest ingratitude on the part of the accused.

Par. 5 That the crime be committed(1) in the palace of the Chief Executive, or in his presence, or(2) where public authorities are engaged in the discharge oftheir duties, or(3) in a place dedicated to religious worship.

Except for the third which requires that official functions are beingperformed at the time of the commission of the crime, the other placesmentioned are aggravating per se even if no official duties or acts of

religious worship are being conducted there.

Cemeteries, however respectable they may be, are not considered asplace dedicated to the worship of God.

PAR. 5. Wherepublic authorities

are engaged inthe discharge of

their duties

PAR. 2. Contemptor insult to public

authorities

In bothPublic authorities are in the performance oftheir duties

Place where public duty is performedIn their office. Outside of their

office.

The offended partyMay or may not bethe public authority

Public authorityshould not be theoffended party

Par. 6. That the crime be committed(1) in the nighttime, or(2) in an uninhabited place, or(3) by a band, whenever such circumstance may facilitate the

commission of the offense.

When present in the same case and their element are distinctly palpable

and can subsist independently, they shall be considered separately.

WHEN NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE OR BAND AGGRAVATING:1. When it facilitatedthe commission of the crime; or2. When especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of

the crime or for the purpose of impunity; or3. When the offendertook advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity.

Nighttime (obscuridad) that period of darkness beginning at end of duskand ending at dawn. Nights are from sunset to sunrise.

It is necessary that the commission of the crime was begun and

completed at nighttime.

When the place of the crime is illuminated by light, nighttime is notaggravating.

GENERAL RULE: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery.EXCEPTION: Where both the treacherous mode of attack and nocturnitywere deliberately decided upon in the same case, they can be consideredseparately if such circumstances have different factual bases. Thus:

In People vs. Berdida, et. al. (June 30, 1966), nighttime wasconsidered since it was purposely sought, and treachery was furtherappreciated because the victims hands and arms were tied together

before he was beaten up by the accused.


17/47

PAGE 41


In People vs. Ong, et. al. (Jan. 30, 1975), there was treachery as thevictim was stabbed while lying face up and defenseless, andnighttime was considered upon proof that it facilitated thecommission of the offense and was taken advantage of by theaccused.

Uninhabited place (despoblado) one where there are no houses at all; aplace at a considerable distance from town, or where the houses arescattered at a great distance from each other.

What actually determines whether this aggravating circumstance shouldbe considered against the accused, aside from the distance and isolationof the place, is the reasonable possibility of the victim receiving orsecuring aid from third persons.

Band (en cuadrilla) whenevermore than three (i.e., at least four) armedmalefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense, itshall be deemed committed by a band.

The requisite four armed persons contemplated in this circumstancemust all be principals by direct participation who acted together in theexecution of the acts constituting the crime.

If one of them was a principal by inducement, there would be nocuadrilla but the aggravating circumstance of having acted with the aid ofarmed men may be considered against the inducer if the other two actedas his accomplice.

This aggravating circumstance is absorbed in the circumstance of abuseof superior strength.

This aggravating circumstance is not applicable in crimes against

chastity.

Par. 7 That the crime be committed on the occasion of aconflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity ormisfortune.

REASON FOR THE AGGRAVATION:The debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst of a greatcalamity, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering bytaking advantage of their misfortune to despoil them. Therefore it isnecessary that the offender took advantage of the calamity or misfortune.

Par. 8 That the crime be committed with the aid of

(1) armed men or(2)persons who insure or afford impunity.

REQUISITES:1. That armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime,

directly or indirectly.

2. That the accused availedhimself of their aid or reliedupon them whenthe crime was committed.

This aggravating circumstance requires that the armed men areaccomplices who take part in that minor capacity directly or indirectly,and not when they were merely present at the crime scene. Neithershould they constitute a band, for then the proper aggravatingcircumstance would be cuadrilla.

WHEN THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE SHALL NOT BECONSIDERED:1. When both the attacking party and the party attacked were equally

armed.2. When the accused as well as those who cooperated with him in the

commission of the crime acted under the same plan and for the samepurpose.

Par. 6 By aband

Par. 8. With theaid of armed men

As to their numberRequires more thanthree armed

malefactors (i.e., atleast four)

At least two

As to their actionRequires that morethan three armedmalefactors shallhave acted togetherin the commission ofan offense.

This circumstance ispresent even if one ofthe offenders merelyrelied on their aid, foractual aid is notnecessary.

If there are four armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed inemployment of a band. If there are three armed men or less, aid of

armed men may be the aggravating circumstance.


18/47

PAGE 41

Aid of armed men includes armed women.

Par. 9 That the accused is a recidivist.

REQUISITES:1. That the offender is on trial for an offense;2. That he waspreviously convictedby final judgmentof another crime;

3. That both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the sametitle of the Code;

4. That the offender is convicted of the new offense.

MEANING OF at the time of his trial for one crime.It is employed in its general sense, including the rendering of the judgment. Itis meant to include everything that is done in the course of the trial, fromarraignment until after sentence is announced by the judge in open court.

Being an ordinary aggravating circumstance, recidivism affects only theperiods of a penalty, except in prostitution and vagrancy (Art. 202) andgambling (PD 1602) wherein recidivism increases the penalties by

degrees. No other generic aggravating circumstance produces thiseffect.

In recidivism it is sufficient that the succeeding offense be committedafter the commission of the preceding offense provided that at the time ofhis trial for the second offense, the accused had already been convictedof the first offense.

If both offenses were committed on the same date, they shall beconsidered as only one, hence, they cannot be separately counted inorder to constitute recidivism. Also, judgments of convicted handed downon the same day shall be considered as only one conviction.

REASON: Because the Code requires that to be considered as separateconvictions, at the time of his trial for one crime the accused shall havebeen previously convicted by final judgment of the other.

To prove recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same in the informationand to attach thereto certified copy of the sentences rendered against theaccused.

Recidivism must be taken into account no matter how many years haveintervened between the first and second felonies.

Even if the accused was granted a pardon for the first offense, but hecommits another felony embraced in the same title of the Code, the first

conviction is still counted to make him a recidivist since pardon does notobliterate the fact of his prior conviction.

The rule is different in the case of amnesty which theoreticallyconsiders the previous transgressions as not punishable.

Par. 10 That the offender has been previously punished for an offenseto which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more

crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty.

REQUISITES ofREITERACIONor HABITUALITY:1. That the accused is on trial for an offense;2. That he previously served sentence for another offense to which the law

attaches ana) Equal or b) Greater penalty, orc) For two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty than that

for the new offense; and3. That he is convicted of the new offense

REITERACION RECIDIVISMAs to the first offense

It is necessary thatthe offender shallhave served out hissentence for the firstoffense

It is enough that afinal judgment hasbeen rendered inthe first offense.

As to the kind of offenses involvedThe previous andsubsequentoffenses must notbe em braced in thesame title of the

Code.

Requires that theoffenses be includedin the same title ofthe Code.

THE FOUR FORMS OF REPETITION ARE:

1. Recidivism (par. 9, Art. 14) where a person, on separate occasions, isconvicted of two offenses embraced in the same title in the RPC. This is ageneric aggravating circumstance.

2. Reiteracion or habituality (par. 10, Art. 14) where the offender has beenpreviously punished for an offense to which the law attaches an equal orgreater penalty or for two crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. This is

a generic aggravating circumstance.


19/47

PAGE 41


3. Multi-recidivism or habitual delinquency (Art. 62, par, 5) where a personwithin a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction ofthe crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa orfalsification, is found guilty of the said crimes a third time or oftener. This isan extraordinary aggravating circumstance.

4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) Where a person commits felony beforebeginning to serve or while serving sentence on a previous conviction for afelony. This is a special aggravating circumstance.

Since reiteracion provides that the accused has duly served the sentencefor his previous conviction/s, or is legally considered to have done so,quasi-recidivism cannot at the same time constitute reiteracion, hencethis aggravating circumstance cannot apply to a quasi-recidivist.

If the same set of facts constitutes recidivism and reiteracion, the liabilityof the accused should be aggravated by recidivism which can easily be

proven.

Par. 11 That the crime be committed in consideration of a price,reward or promise.

When this aggravating circumstance is present, there must be two ormore principals, the one who gave or offered the price or promise andthe one who accepted it, both of whom are principals.

If without previous promise it was given voluntarily after the crime hadbeen committed as an expression of his appreciation for the sympathyand aid shown by the other accused, it should not be taken into

consideration for the purpose of increasing the penalty.

The price, reward or promise need not consist of or refer to materialthings or that the same were actually delivered, it being sufficient that theoffer made by the principal by inducement be accepted by the principalby direct participation before the commission of the offense.

Par. 12 That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire,poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional damage thereto,derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involvinggreat waste and ruin.

When another aggravating circumstance already qualifies the crime, anyof these aggravating circumstances shall be considered as genericaggravating circumstance only.

A killing committed through any of these qualifies the crime to murder,except if arson was resorted to but without intent to kill, in view of P.D.

1613 which provides a specific penalty for that situation.

PAR. 12 bymeans of

inundation, fire,etc.

PAR. 10 on theoccasion of aconflagration,shipwreck, etc.

The crime iscommitted by meansof any such actsinvolving greatwaste or ruin.

The crime iscommitted on theoccasion of acalamity or misfortune.

Par. 13 That the act be committed with evident premeditation

REQUISITES:The prosecution must prove 1. The time when the offender determined to commit the crime;2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his

determination; and3. A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution, to

allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow hisconscience to overcome the resolution of his will.

To establish evident premeditation, it must be shown that there was a periodsufficient to afford full opportunity for meditation and reflection, a time

adequate to allow the conscience to overcome the resolution of the will, aswell as outward acts showing the intent to kill. It must be shown that theoffender had sufficient time to reflect upon the consequences of his act butstill persisted in his determination to commit the crime. (PEOPLE vs. SILVA,et. al., GR No. 140871, August 8, 2002)

The essence of evident premeditation is that the execution of the criminalact is preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the resolution tocarry out the criminal intent within a space of time sufficient to arrive at acalm judgment. (PEOPLE vs. ABADIES, GR No. 135975, August 14,2002)


20/47

PAGE 41

Evident premeditation is presumed to exist when conspiracy is directlyestablished. When conspiracy is merely implied, evident premeditationcannot be presumed, the latter must be proved like any other fact.(PEOPLE vs. SAPIGAO, et. al., GR No. 144975, June 18, 2003)

Premeditation is absorbedby reward or promise.

When the offender decides to kill a particular person and premeditatedon the killing of the latter, but when he carried out his plan he actuallykilled another person, it cannot properly be said that he premeditated onthe killing of the actual victim.

But if the offender premeditated on the killing of anyperson, it is properto consider against the offender the aggravating circumstance ofpremeditation, because whoever is killed by him is contemplated in hispremeditation.

Par. 14 That (1) craft, (2) fraud, or (3) disguise be employed

Craft (astucia) involved the use of intellectual trickery or cunning on thepart of the accused.

- it is a chicanery resorted to by the accused to aid in theexecution of his criminal design. It is employed as a scheme in the executionof the crime.

Fraud (fraude) insidious words or machinations used to induce the victimto act in a manner which would enable the offender to carry out his design.

FRAUD CRAFTWhere there is adirect inducement

by insidious wordsor machinations,fraud is present.

The act of theaccused done in

order not to arousethe suspicion of thevictim constitutescraft.

According to Justice Regalado, the fine distinctions between craft andfraud would not really be called for as these terms in Art. 14 arevariants of means employed to deceive the victim and if all are present inthe same case, they shall be applied as a single aggravatingcircumstance.

Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery if they have been

deliberately adopted as the means, methods or forms for the

treacherous strategy, or they may co-exist independently where they areadopted for a different purpose in the commission of the crime.

For instance:

In People vs. San Pedro (Jan. 22, 1980), where the accusedpretended to hire the driver in order to get his vehicle, it was held thatthere was craft directed to the theft of the vehicle, separate from the

means subsequently used to treacherously kill the defenselessdriver.

In People vs. Masilang (July 11, 1986) there was also craft whereafter hitching a ride, the accused requested the driver to take them toa place to visit somebody, when in fact they had already planned tokill the driver.

Disguise (disfraz) resorting to any device to conceal identity.

The test of disguise is whether the device or contrivance resorted to bythe offender was intended to or did make identification more difficult,such as the use of a mask or false hair or beard.

The use of an assumed name in the publication of a libel constitutesdisguise.

Par. 15 That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or (2) meansbe employed to weaken the defense.

Par. 15 enunciates two aggravating circumstances, namely, thatadvantage was taken of superior strength, or that means were employedby the offender to weaken the defense of the victim, either of whichqualifies a killing to murder.

MEANING OF advantage be taken:To deliberately use excessive force that is out of proportion to the means forself-defense available to the person attacked. (PEOPLE vs. LOBRIGAS, et.al., GR No. 147649, December 17, 2002)

NO ADVANTAGE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH IN THE FOLLOWING:1. One who attacks another with passion and obfuscation does not take

advantage of his superior strength.2. When a quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal blow was struck at a

time when the aggressor and his victim were engaged against each other

as man to man.


21/47

PAGE 41


For abuse of superior strength, the test is the relative strength of theoffender and his victim, whether or not he took advantage of his greaterstrength.

When there are several offenders participating in the crime, they must all

be principals by direct participation and their attack against the victimmust be concerted and intended to be so.

Abuse of superior strength is inherent in the crime of parricide where thehusband kills the wife. It is generally accepted that the husband isphysically stronger than the wife.

Abuse of superior strength is also present when the offender uses aweapon which is out of proportion to the defense available to theoffended party.

by a band abuse of superior

strengthThe element of bandis appreciated whenthe offense iscommitted by morethan three armedmalefactorsregardless of thecomparative strengthof the victim or victims.

The gravamen ofabuse of superiorityis the takingadvantage by theculprits of thei rcollective strength tooverpower theirrelatively weakervictim or victims.

Hence, what is takeninto account here isnot the number ofaggressors nor thefact that they arearmed, but theirrelative physicalstrength vis-a vis theoffended party.

Abuse of superior strength absorbs cuadrilla (band).

Means employed to weaken defense - the offender employs means thatmateriallyweakens the resisting power of the offended party.

EXAMPLES OF means employed to weaken defense

1. Where one, struggling with another, suddenly throws a cloak over thehead of his opponent and while in this situation he wounds or kills him.

2. One who, while fighting with another, suddenly casts sand or dirt uponthe latter eyes and then wounds or kills him.

3. When the offender, who had the intention to kill the victim, made thedeceased intoxicated, thereby materially weakening the latters resistingpower.

This circumstance is applicable only to crimes against persons, andsometimes against person and property, such as robbery with physicalinjuries or homicide.

Par. 16 That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).

Treachery (alevosia) is present when the offender commits any of thecrimes against person, employing means, methods or forms in the executionthereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without riskto himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.

REQUISITES OF TREACHERY:1. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend

himself; and2. That the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or

form of attack employed by him.

The test of treachery is not only the relative position of the parties but,more specifically, whether or not the victim was forewarned or affordedthe opportunity to make a defense or to ward off the attack.

RULES REGARDING TREACHERY:1. Applicable only to crimes against persons.2. Means, methods or forms need not insure accomplishment of crime.3. The mode of attack must be consciously adopted.

Treachery is taken into account even if the crime against the person iscomplexed with another felony involving a different classification in theCode. Accordingly, in the special complex crime of robbery withhomicide, treachery but can be appreciated insofar as the killing isconcerned.


22/47

PAGE 41

The suddenness of attack does not, of itself, suffice to support a findingof alevosia, even if the purpose was to kill, so long as the decision wasmade all of a sudden and the victims helpless position was accidental.

Treachery must be appreciated in the killing of a child even if the mannerof attack is not shown. It exists in the commission of the crime when theadult person illegally attacks a child of tender years and causes hisdeath.

WHEN MUST TREACHERY BE PRESENT:When the aggression is continuous, treachery must be present in thebeginning of the assault. (PEOPLE vs. MANALAD, GR No. 128593, August14, 2002)

Thus, even if the deceased was shot while he was lying wounded onthe ground, it appearing that the firing of the shot was a merecontinuation of the assaultin which the deceased was wounded, withno appreciable time intervening between the delivery of the blowsand the firing of the shot, it cannot be said that the crime wasattended by treachery.

When the assault was not continuous, in that there was interruption, it issufficient that treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow was given.

Hence, even though in the inception of the aggression which endedin the death of the deceased, treachery was not present, if there wasa break in the continuity of the aggression and at the time of the fatalwound was inflicted on the deceased he was defenseless, thecircumstance of treachery must be taken into account.

ALEVOSIA SHOULD BE CONSIDERED EVEN IF:1. The victim was not predetermined but there was a generic intent to

treacherously kill any first two persons belonging to a class. (The same

rule obtains for evident premeditation).2. There was aberratio ictus and the bullet hit a person different from that

intended. (The rule is different in evident premeditation).3. There was error in personae, hence the victim was not the one intended

by the accused. (A different rule is applied in evident premeditation).REASON FOR THE RULE: When there is treachery, it is impossible foreither the intended victim or the actual victim to defend himself againstthe aggression.

TREACHERY ABSORBS:

1. Craft2. Abuse of superior strength3. Employing means to weaken the defense4. Cuadrilla (band)5. Aid of armed men6. Nightt ime

Par. 17 That means be employed or circumstances brought aboutwhich add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.

Ignominy is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which addsdisgrace and obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime.

MEANING OF which add ignominy to the natural effects thereofThe means employed or the circumstances brought about must tend to

make the effects of the crime more humiliating to victim or to put the offendedparty to shame, or add to his moral suffering. Thus it is incorrect toappreciate ignominy where the victim was already dead when his body wasdismembered, for such act may not be considered to have added to the

victims moral suffering or humiliation. (People vs. Carmina, G.R. No. 81404,January 28, 1991)

Applicable to crimes against chastity, less serious physical injuries, lightor grave coercion, and murder.

Par. 18 That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.

Unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for thepurpose.

Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and not for escape.

REASON FOR AGGRAVATION:One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men to guard theirproperty and provide for their personal safety, shows a greater perversity, agreater audacity; hence, the law punishes him with more severity.

Par. 19 That as a means to the commission of a crime, a wall, roof,floor, door, or window be broken.

This circumstance is aggravating only in those cases where the offenderresorted to any of said means to enter the house. If the wall, etc., isbroken in order to get out of the place, it is not an aggravating

circumstance.


23/47

PAGE 41


PAR. 19 PAR. 18It involves thebreaking(rompimiento) of theenumerated parts ofthe house.

Presupposes thatthere is no suchbreaking as by entrythrough the window.

If the offender broke a window to enable himself to reach a purse withmoney on the table near that window, which he took while his body wasoutside of the building, the crime of theft was attended by thisaggravating circumstance. It is not necessary that the offender shouldhave entered the building.

Par. 20 That the crime be committed(1) with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age, or(2) by means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar

means.

TWO DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES GROUPED IN THIS PARAGRAPH:

1. With the aid of persons under fifteen years of age: Tends to repress, so far as possible, the frequent practice resorted

to by professional criminals to avail themselves of minors takingadvantage of theirirresponsibility.

2. By means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar means:

Intended to counteract the great facilities found by modern criminalsin said means to commit crime and flee and abscond once the sameis committed.

Use of motor vehicle is aggravating where the accused purposelyand deliberatelyused the motor vehicle in going to the place of thecrime, in carrying away the effects thereof, and in facilitating theirescape.

MEANING OF or other similar meansShould be understood as referring to motorized vehicles or other efficientmeans of transportation similar to automobile or airplane.

Par. 21 That the wrong done in the commission of the crime bedeliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for itscommission.

Cruelty there is cruelty when the culprit enjoys and delights in making hisvictim suffer slowly and gradually, causing unnecessary physical pain in theconsummation of the criminal act.

REQUISITES OF CRUELTY:1. That the injury caused be deliberately increasedby causing other wrong;2. That the other wrong be unnecessaryfor the execution of the purpose of

the offender.

Cruelty is not inherent in crimes against persons. In order for it to be

appreciated, there must be positive proof that the wounds found on thebody of the victim were inflicted while he was still alive in orderunnecessarily to prolong physical suffering.

If the victim was already dead when the acts of mutilation were beingperformed, this would also qualify the killing to murder due to outragingof his corpse.

IGNOMINY(PAR.17)

CRUELTY (PAR.21)

Involves moralsuffering

Refers to physicalsuffering

Unlike mitigating circumstances (par. 10, Art. 13), there is no provisionfor aggravating circumstances of a similar or analogous character.

ART. 15 ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES

Alternative circumstances are those which must be taken intoconsideration as aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effectsof the crime and the other conditions attending its commission.

BASIS:The nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions attending its

commission.

THE ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE:1. Relationship;2. Intoxication; and3. Degree of instruction and education of the offender.

RELATIONSHIPThe alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into considerationwhen the offended party is the

a) Spouse,b) Ascendant,

c) Descendant,


24/47

PAGE 41

d) Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister, ore) Relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender.

OTHER RELATIVES INCLUDED:1. The relationship of stepfather or stepmother and stepson or

stepdaughter.REASON: It is the duty of the stepparents to bestow upon their

stepchildren a mothers/fathers affection, care and protection.2. The relationship of adopted parent and adopted child.

But the relationship of uncle and niece is not covered by any of therelationship mentioned.

WHEN RELATIONSHIP MITIGATING AND WHEN AGGRAVATING:1. As a rule, relationship is mitigating in crimes against property, by analogy

to the provisions of Art. 332.

Thus, relationship is mitigating in the crimes of robbery (Arts. 294-302), usurpation (Art. 312), fraudulent insolvency (Art. 314) andarson (Arts. 321-322, 325-326).

2. In crimes against persons a) It is aggravating where the offended party is a relative of

I. a higher degree than the offender, orII. when the offender and the offended party are relatives of the

same level(e.g. brothers)b) But when it comes to physical injuries:

i. It is aggravating when the crime involves serious physicalinjuries (Art. 263), even if the offended party is a descendant ofthe offender. But the serious physical injuries must not beinflicted by a parent upon his child by excessive chastisement.

ii. It is mitigating when the offense committed is less seriousphysical injuries or slight physical injuries, if the offended party

is a relative of a lower degree.iii. It is aggravating if the offended party is a relative of a higher

degree of the offender.c) When the crime is homicide or murder, relationship is aggravating

even if the victim of the crime is a relative of a lower degree.d) In rape, relationship is aggravating where a stepfather raped his

stepdaughter or in a case where a father raped his own daughter.3. In crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness (Art. 336),

relationship is always aggravating, regardless of whether the offender isa relative of a higher or lower degree of the offended party.

When the qualification given to the crime is derived from the relationship

between the offender and the offended party, it is neither mitigating nor

aggravating, because it is inseparable from and inherent in the offense.(e.g. parricide, adultery and concubinage).

WHEN INTOXICATION MITIGATING AND WHEN AGGRAVATING:1. Mitigating

i. If intoxication is not habitual, orii. If intoxication is not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony.

2. Aggravating i. If intoxication is habitual, orii. If it is intentional(subsequent to the plan to commit a felony).

TO BE ENTITLED TO THE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE OFINTOXICATION, IT MUST BE SHOWN:1. That at the time of the commission of the criminal act, the accused has

taken such quantity of alcoholic drinks as to blur his reason and deprivehim of a certain degree of control, and

2. That such intoxication is not habitual, or subsequent to the plan tocommit the felony.

To be mitigating, the accuseds state of intoxication must be proved.

Once intoxication is established by satisfactory evidence, in the absenceof proof to the contrary, it is presumed to be non-habitual orunintentional.

Instruction or education as an alternative circumstance, does not refer only to literary but

more to the level of intelligence of the accused.- refers to the lack of sufficient intelligence and knowledge of the full

significance of ones acts.- Low degree of instruction and education or lack of it is generally

mitigating. High degree of instruction and education is aggravating, when theoffender took advantage of his learning in committing the crime.

GENERAL RULE: Lack of sufficient education is mitigating.EXCEPTIONS:1. Crimes against property (e.g. arson, estafa, theft, robbery)2. Crimes against chastity, and3. Treason because love of country should be a natural feeling of every

citizen, however unlettered or uncultured he may be.

TITLE TWO: PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES

ART. 16 WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE


25/47

PAGE 41


FOR GRAVE AND LESS GRAVE FELONIES1. Principals2. Accomplices3. Accessories

FOR LIGHT FELONIES1. Principals2. Accomplices

Accessories are not liable for light felonies.REASON: In the commission of light felonies, the social wrongas well asthe individual prejudice is so small that penal sanction is deemed notnecessary for accessories.

The classification of the offenders as principal, accomplice, or anaccessory is essential under the RPC. The classification maybe appliedto special laws only if the latter provides for the same graduatedpenalties as those provided under the RPC.

TWO PARTIES IN ALL CRIMES

1. Active subject (the criminal)

Art. 16 enumerates the active subjects of the crime.2. Passive subject (the injured party)

Is the holder of the injured right: the man, the juristic person, thegroup, and the State.

Only natural persons can be the active subject of crime because of thehighly personal nature of the criminal responsibility.

However, corporation and partnership can be a passive subject of acrime.

Corpses and animals cannot be passive subjects because they have norights that may be injured.EXCEPTION: Under Art. 253, the crime of defamation may be committedif the imputation tends to blacken the memory of one who is dead.

This article applies only when the offenders are to be judged by theirindividual, and not collective, liability.

ART. 17 PRINCIPALS

THE FOLLOWING ARE PRINCIPALS:

1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act (PRINCIPAL BYDIRECT PARTICIPATION)

2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it (PRINCIPAL BYINDUCTION)

3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another actwithout which it would not have been accomplished (PRINCIPAL BYINDISPENSABLE COOPERATION).

Par. 1 Principals by direct participation

REQUISITES:1. That theyparticipatedin the criminal resolution; and2. That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution

by acts which directly tended to the same end.

MEANING OF personally took part in its executionThat the principal by direct participation must be at the scene of thecommission of the crime, personally taking part in its execution.

Par. 2 Principals by induction

REQUISITES1. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the

commission of the crime; and2. That such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of

the crime by the material executor.

One cannot be held guilty of having instigated the commission of thecrime without first being shown that the crime was actually committed (orattempted) by another.

Thus, there can be no principal by inducement (or by indispensablecooperation) unless there is a principal by direct participation. But therecan be a principal by direct participation without a principal byinducement (or by indispensable cooperation).

TWO WAYS OF BECOMING PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION:1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime by

a) Using irresistible force.b) Causing uncontrollable fear.


26/47

PAGE 41

In these cases, there is no conspiracy, not even a unity of criminalpurpose and intention. Only the one using the force or causing thefear is criminally liable. The material executor is not criminally liablebecause of Art. 12, pars. 5 and 6 (exempting circumstances)

2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime by a) Giving of price, or offering of reward or promise.

The one giving the price or offering the reward or promise is a

principal by inducement while the one committing the crime inconsideration thereof is a principal by direct participation. Thereis collective criminal responsibility.

b) Using words of command

The person who used the words of command is a principal byinducement while the person who committed the crime becauseof the words of command is a principal by direct participation.There is also collective criminal responsibility.

The inducement must precede the act induced and must be so influentialin producing the criminal act that without it, the act would not have beenperformed.

If the person who actually committed the crime had reason of his own tocommit the crime, it cannot be said that the inducement was influential inproducing the criminal act.

PRINCIPAL BYINDUCEMENT

OFFENDER WHOMADE

PROPOSAL TOCOMMIT AFELONY

In both

There is an inducement to commit a crime

When liable

Becomes liable onlywhen the crime iscommitted by theprincipal by directparticipation.

The mere proposal tocommit a felony ispunishable in treasonor rebellion.However, the personto whom the proposalis made should notcommit the crime,otherwise, the

proponent becomes a

principal byinducement.

What kind of crime involved

Involves any crime The proposal to bepunishable mustinvolve only treasonor rebellion.

EFFECTS OF ACQUITTAL OF PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATIONUPON LIABILITY OF PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT:1. Conspiracy is negatived by the acquittal of co-defendant.2. One cannot be held guilty of having instigated the commission of a crime

without first being shown that the crime has been actually committed byanother.

But if the one charged as principal by direct participation is acquittedbecause he acted without criminal intent or malice, his acquittal is not

a ground for the acquittal of the principal by inducement.REASON FOR THE RULE: In exempting circumstances, such aswhen the act is not voluntary because of lack of intent on the part ofthe accused, there is a crime committed, only that the accused is nota criminal.

Par. 3 Principal by indispensable cooperation

REQUISITES:1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there is either anterior

conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and intention immediately beforethe commission of the crime charged; and

2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act,without which it would not have been accomplished.

MEANING OF cooperation in the commission of the offenseMeans to desire or wish in common a thing. But that common will or purposedoes not necessarily mean previous understanding, for it can be explained orinferred from the circumstances of each case.

If the cooperation is not indispensable, the offender is only anaccomplice.


27/47

PAGE 41


COLLECTIVE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

This is present when the offenders are criminally liable in the samemanner and to the same extent. The penalty to be imposed must be thesame for all.

Principals by direct participation have collective criminal responsibility.

Principals by induction, except those who directly forced another tocommit a crime, and principals by direct participation have collectivecriminal responsibility. Principals by indispensable cooperation havecollective criminal responsibilities with the principals by directparticipation.

INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY

In the absence of any previous conspiracy, unity of criminal purpose andintention immediately before the commission of the crime, or communityof criminal design, the criminal responsibility arising from different actsdirected against one and the same person is individual and not collective,and each of the participants is liable only for the act committed b

Documents

Crim Law Mem Aid