Criminal Law I
description
Transcript of Criminal Law I
-
ART.1 RPC When Act Takes Effect February 1, 1932
Criminal law is that branch or division of municipal law which
- defines crimes,
- treats of their nature and
- provides for their punishment.
Characteristics of Criminal Law:
1. General binding on all persons who reside or sojourn in
the Philippines
Exceptions:
a. Treaty Stipulation
b. Laws of Preferential Application
c. Principles of Public International Law
Example
(1). sovereigns and other chiefs of state
(2). Ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, minister resident
and charges daffaires (BUT consuls, vice-consuls and
other foreign commercial representatives CANNOT claim the
privileges and immunities accorded to ambassadors and
ministers.)
2. Territorial penal laws of the Philippines are enforceable
only within its territory
Exceptions: (Art. 2 of RPC binding even on crimes
committed outside the Philippines)
a. offense committed while on a Philippine ship or airship
b. forging or counterfeiting any coin or
currency note of the Philippines or obligations and the
securities issued by the Government
c. introduction into the country of the above-mentioned
obligations and securities
d. while being public officers and employees, an offense
committed in the exercise of their functions
e. crimes against national security and the law of the
nations defined in Title One of Book Two
3. Prospective the law does not have any retroactive effect.
Exception: when the law is favorable to the accused
Exceptions to the Exception:
a. The new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending
actions or existing causes of action
b. Offender is a habitual criminal
Theories of Criminal Law:
1. Classical Theory basis is mans free will to choose between
good and evil, that is why more stress is placed upon the
result of the felonious act than upon the criminal himself.
The purpose of penalty is retribution. The RPC is generally
governed by this theory.
2. Positivist Theory basis is the sum of social and economic
phenomena which conditions man to do wrong in spite of or
contrary to his volition. This is exemplified in the provisions
on impossible crimes and habitual delinquency.
3. Mixed Theory combination of the classical and positivist
theories wherein crimes that are economic and social in nature
should be dealt in a positive manner. The law is thus
more compassionate.
Construction of Penal Laws:
1. Liberally construed in favor of offender
Ex:
a. the offender must clearly fall within the terms of the law
b. an act is criminal only when made so by the statute
2. In cases of conflict with official translation, original
Spanish text is controlling,
3. No interpretation by analogy.
LIMITATIONS ON POWER OF CONGRESS TO ENACT PENAL
LAWS
1. ex post facto law
2. bill of attainder
3. law that violates the equal protection clause
of the constitution
4. law which imposes cruel and unusual punishments nor excessive
fines
R.A. No. 75 - penalizes acts which would impair the proper
observance by the Republic and inhabitants of the Philippines of
the immunities, rights, and privileges of duly accredited
foreign diplomatic representatives in the Philippines
Art. 2. Application of RPC Provisions
Application of its provisions. Except as provided in the treaties
and laws
of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be
enforced not
only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its
interior
waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction,
against
those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or
airship
RULES:
1. Philippine vessel or airship Philippine law shall apply to
offenses committed in vessels registered with the Philippine
Bureau of Customs. It is the registration, not the
citizenship of the owner which matters.
2. Foreign vessel
a. French Rule
General Rule: Crimes committed aboard a foreign vessel
within the territorial waters of a country are NOT
triable in the courts of such country.
Exception: commission affects the peace and security of
the territory, or the safety of the state is endangered.
b. English Rule
General Rule: Crimes committed aboard a foreign vessel
within the territorial waters of a country are triable
in the courts of such country.
Exception: When the crime merely affects things within
the vessel or it refers to the internal management
thereof.
This is applicable in the Philippines.
When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a foreign
country, the NATIONALITY of the vessel will ALWAYS
determine jurisdiction because war vessels are part of
the sovereignty of the country to whose navel
force they belong.
These rules are NOT applicable if the vessel is on the
high seas when the crime was committed, in these cases,
the laws of the nationality of the ship will always apply.
The country of registry determines the nationality of
the vessel, NOT ITS OWNERSHIP. A Filipino-owned
vessel registered in China must fly the Chinese flag.
Extraterritorial refers to the application of the
Revised Penal Code outside the Philippines territory:
Three International Theories on Aerial Jurisdiction
a. Free Zone Theory
The atmosphere over the country is free and not
subject to the jurisdiction of the subjacent state,
except for the protection of its national security
and public order.
b. Relative Theory
The subjacent state exercises jurisdiction over the
atmosphere only to the extent that it can effectively
exercise control thereof.
c. Absolute Theory
1. The subjacent state has complete jurisdiction
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);
-
over the atmosphere above it subject only to the
innocent passage by aircraft of a foreign country.
NOTE: The Philippines adopts this theory.
2. Under this theory, if the crime is committed in an
aircraft, no matter how high, as long as it can be
established that it is within the Philippine
atmosphere, Philippine criminal law will govern.
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of
the
Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by
the Government of the Philippine Islands;
1. The forgery is committed abroad
2. And it refers to Philippine coin, currency note,
obligation and security
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction
into these islands of the obligations and securities
mentioned
in the presiding number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit
an
offense in the exercise of their functions; or
a) Those having to do with the discharge of their duties
in a foreign country.
b) The functions contemplated are those, which are, under
the law:
i) to be performed by the public officer
ii) in the Foreign Service of the Philippine government
iii) in a foreign country.
NOTE: The Revised Penal Code governs if the crime
(whether or not in relation to the exercise of
public functions) was committed within the
Philippine Embassy or within the embassy grounds
in a foreign country. This is because embassy
grounds are considered an extension of sovereignty.
Thus the crime is deemed to have been committed
in Philippine soil.
Illustration: A Philippine consulate official who is
validly married here in the Philippines and who marries
again in a foreign country cannot be prosecuted
here for bigamy because this is a crime not connected
with his official duties. However, if the second marriage
was celebrated within the Philippine embassy, he may be
prosecuted here, since it is as if he contracted the
marriage here in the Philippines.
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
security and
the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this
Code.
1. Rebellion is not included.
2. Any crime against public order is under the jurisdiction
of the host country.
Art. 3. Felonies
Definitions - Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies
(delitos).
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo)
but also by means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent
and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Felonies acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code
Crime acts and omissions punishable by any law.
Act an overt or external act
Omission failure to perform a duty required by law
ELEMENTS OF FELONIES
a. There must be an act or omission
b. That the act or omission must be punishable by the RPC
c. That the act is performed or the commission incurred by means
of dolo or culpa
Dolo - deliberate intent.Must be coupled with freedom of action
and intelligence on the part of the offender as to the
act done by him.
Actus Reus - Physical act
Mens rea - a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful purpose or
criminal intent.
Gravamen of the offense
Omission is a. the failure to perform a duty
b. required by law.
c. It is important that there is a law requiring
the performance of an act, if there is no
positive duty, there is no liability.
Examples: Omission
1. Failure to render assistance
2. Failure to issue receipt
3. non disclosure of knowledge of conspiracy
against the government.
NULLUM CRIMEN, NULLA POENA SINE LEGE There is no crime
when
there is no law punishing it.
Classification Of Felonies According To The Means By Which They Are
Committed:
1. Intentional Felonies- by means of deceit (dolo)
Requisites:
a. freedom
b. intelligence
c. intent.
MISTAKE OF FACT (Ignorantia Facti Excusat)misapprehension
of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to
another. He is not criminally liable.
Requisites:
a. the act done would have been lawful had the facts
been as the accused believed them to be
b. intention is lawful
c. mistake must be without fault or carelessness by
the accused
Example:
People v. Ah Chong (1910)
A houseboy who stabs his roommate in the dark,
honestly mistaking the latter to be a robber
responsible for a series of break-ins in the area,
and after crying out sufficient warnings and
believing himself to be under attack, cannot be
held criminally liable for homicide.
2. Culpable Felonies- by means of fault (culpa)
Requisites:
a. freedom
b. intelligence
c. negligence (lack of foresight) and imprudence (lack of skill)
ART.4 Criminal Liability
Par.1 Criminal liability for a felony committed different from
that intended to be committed
Requisites:
1. felony has been committed intentionally
2. injury or damage done to the other party is the direct,
natural and logical consequence of the felony
Hence, since he is still motivated by criminal intent,
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);
-
the offender is criminally liable in:
1. Error in personae mistake in identity
2. Abberatio ictus mistake in blow
3. Praetor intentionem - lack of intent to commit so
grave a wrong
PROXIMATE CAUSE the cause, which in the natural and
continuous sequence unbroken by any efficient intervening
cause, produces the injury, without which the result would
not have occurred
Par. 2 Impossible Crime
Requisites:
1. Act would have been an offense against persons or property.
2. There was criminal intent.
3. Accomplishment is inherently impossible; or inadequate
or ineffectual means are employed.
4. Act is not an actual violation of another provision of
the Code or of special law.
Impossible crime occurs when there is:
1. inherent impossibility to commit the crime
2. inadequate means to consummate the crime
3. ineffectual means to consummate the crime
Art. 5: Duty Of The Courts, Acts Not Covered By Law
Duty of the court in connection with acts which should
be repressed but which are not covered by the law, and in cases
of excessive penalties
Note: Paragraph 2 does not apply to crimes punishable by special
law, including profiteering, and illegal possession of firearms
or drugs. There can be no executive clemency for these crimes.
Article 5 covers two situations:
1. The court cannot convict the accused because the acts do not
constitute a crime.
a. The proper judgment is acquittal.
b. The court is mandated to report to the Chief Executive that
said act be made subject of penal legislation and why.
2. Where the court finds the penalty prescribed for the crime
too harsh considering the conditions surrounding the
commission of the crime,
a. The judge should impose the law.
b. The most that he could do is recommend to the Chief
Executive to grant executive clemency.
ART.6 Consummated, Frustrated, And Attempted Felonies
STAGES OF EXECUTION:
1. CONSUMMATED when all the elements necessary for
its execution
and accomplishment are present
2. FRUSTRATED
Elements:
a. offender performs all acts of execution
b. all these acts would produce the felony as a consequence
c. BUT the felony is NOT produced
d. by reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator
3. ATTEMPTED
Elements:
a. offender commences the felony directly by overt acts
b. does not perform all acts which would produce the felony
c. his acts are not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance
Crimes, which do not admit of Frustrated and Attempted Stages:
1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless the law
provides otherwise
2. Formal crimes consummated in one instance (Ex: slander, adultery, etc.)
3. Impossible Crimes
4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt
(Ex: attempt to flee to an enemy country, treason, corruption of
minors)
5. Felonies by omission
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement (Ex: betting in sports:
ending,
corruption of public officers)
Crimes which do not admit of Frustrated Stage:
1. Rape
2. Bribery
3. Corruption of Public Officers
4. Adultery
5. Physical Injury
2 stages in the development of a crime:
1. Internal acts
- e.g. mere ideas of the mind
- not punishable
2. External acts
a. Preparatory acts - ordinarily not punishable except when
considered by law as independent crimes (e.g. Art. 304,
Possession of picklocks and similar tools)
b. Acts of Execution - punishable under the RPC
Attempted vs. Frustrated Felony
ART.7 When Light Felonies Are Punishable
General Rule: Punishable only when they have been consummated
Exception:
Even if not consummated, if committed against persons or property
Ex: slight physical injuries, theft, alteration of
boundary marks, malicious mischief, and intriguing
against honor.
Note: 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
CONSPIRACY
Requisites:
1. Two or more persons come to an agreement
2. For the commission of a felony
3. And they decide to commit it
javascript:void(0);http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aFJeUVJzsTk/U4h18SltybI/AAAAAAAAAcA/K7KZFLj9cJ4/s1600/Consummated++Frustrated+Attempted+Felony.png
-
Concepts of Conspiracy:
1. As a crime in itself
Ex: conspiracy to commit rebellion, insurrection, treason,
sedition, coup d etat
2. Merely as a means to commit a crime
Requisites:
a. a prior and express agreement
b. participants acted in concert or simultaneously, which is
indicative of a meeting of the minds towards a
common criminal objective
Note: Conspiracy to commit a felony is different from
conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability.
General Rule: Conspiracy to commit a felony is not punishable since
it is merely a preparatory act.
Exception: when the law specifically provides for
a penalty
Ex: rebellion, insurrection, sedition,
coup d etat
General Rule: The act of one is the act of all.
Exception: Unless one or some of the conspirators
committed some other crime which
is not part of the intended crime.
Exception to the exception: When the act
constitutes an indivisible offense.
People v. Abut, et al. (GR No. 137601, April 24, 2003)
OVERT ACTS IN CONSPIRACY MUST CONSIST OF:
1. Active participation in the actual commission of the crime
itself, or
2. Moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at
the time of the commission of the crime, or
3. Exerting a moral ascendance over the other co-conspirators
by moving them to execute or implement the criminal plan
PROPOSAL TO COMMIT A FELONY
Requisites:
1. A person has decided to commit a felony
2. And proposes its execution to some other person or persons
People vs. Nierra
If a co-conspirator merely cooperated in the commission of
the crime with insignificant or minimal acts, such co-conspirator
should be punished as an accomplice only.
The common notion is that when there is conspiracy involved,
the participants are punished as principals. This notion is
no longer absolute. The reason given is that penal laws
always favor a milder form of responsibility upon and offender.
Illustration:
There was a planned robbery, and the taxi driver was present
during the planning. The taxi driver agreed for the use of
his cab but said, I will bring you there, and after
committing the robbery I will return later. The taxi driver
brought the conspirators where the robbery would be committed.
After the robbery was finished, he took the conspirators
back to his taxi and brought them away. It was held that
the taxi driver was liable only as an accomplice. His
cooperation was not really indispensable. The robbers could
have engaged another taxi. The taxi driver did not really
stay during the commission of the robbery. At most,
what he only extended was his cooperation.
A conspiracy is possible even when participants are not known to each other. When several persons who do not know each
other simultaneously attack the victim, the act of one is the
act of all, regardless of the degree of injury inflicted by
any one of them. All will be liable for the consequences.
Do not think that participants are always known to each other.
The Supreme Court has ruled that one who desisted is not
criminally liable. As pointed out earlier, desistance is true
only in the attempted stage. Before this stage, there is only
a preparatory stage. Conspiracy is only in the preparatory stage..
Illustrations:
A thought of having her husband killed because the latter was
maltreating her. She hired some persons to kill him and
pointed at her husband. The goons got hold of her husband
and started mauling him. The wife took pity and shouted
for them to stop but the goons continued. The wife ran away.
The wife was prosecuted for parricide. But the Supreme Court
said that there was desistance so she is not criminally
liable.
Do not search for an agreement among the participants. If they
acted simultaneously to bring about their common intention,
conspiracy exists. And when conspiracy exists, do not consider
the degree of participation of each conspiracy because the act
of one is the act of all. As a general rule, they have equal
responsibility.
Illustration:
A, B and C have been courting the same lady for several years.
On several occasions, they even visited the lady on intervening
hours. Because of this, A, B and C became hostile with one
another.
One day, D invited the young lady and she accepted the invitation.
Eventually, the young lady agreed to marry D. When A, B and C
learned about this, they all stood up to leave the house of
the young lady feeling disappointed. When A looked back at the
young lady with D, he saw D laughing menacingly. At that
instance,
A stabbed D. C and B followed. In this case, it was held that
conspiracy was present
People v. Pangilinan,
Implied Conspiracy Conspiracy need not be direct but may be
inferred
from the conduct of the parties, their joint purpose, community of interest and in the mode and manner of commission of
the offense.
The legal effects of implied conspiracy are:
a. Not all those present at the crime scene will be considered
conspirators;
b. Only those who participated in the criminal acts during the
commission of the crime will be considered co-conspirators;
c. Mere acquiescence to or approval of the commission of the
crime, without any act of criminal participation, shall not render
one
criminally liable as co-conspirator.
Siton vs. CA,
The idea of a conspiracy is incompatible with the idea of a free
for all. There is no definite opponent or definite intent as when
a basketball crowd beats a referee to death.
ART.9 Grave Felonies, Less Grave Felonies And Light Felonies
Importance of Classification
1. To determine whether the felonies can be complexed or not. 2. To determine the prescription of the crime and of the penalty.
Penalties (imprisonment):
1. Grave felonies afflictive penalties: 6 yrs. and 1 day to
reclusion perpetua (life)
2. Less grave felonies correctional penalties: 1 month and 1
day to 6 years
3. Light felonies - arresto menor (1 day to 30 days)
As to the liability of the participants in a grave, less grave
or light felony:
1. When the felony is grave, or less grave, all participants are
criminally liable.
2. But where the felony is only light, only the principal and
the accomplice are liable. The accessory is not.
Therefore, it is only when the light felony is against persons
or property that criminal liability attaches to the principal
or accomplice, even though the felony is only attempted or
frustrated, but accessories are not liable for light felonies.
ART.10 Offenses Not Subject To The Provisions Of RPC
General Rule: RPC provisions are supplementary to special laws.
Exceptions:
1. when special law provides otherwise
2. when provision of RPC are impossible of application, either
by express provision or by necessary implication
Provisions of RPC applicable to special laws:
- Art. 16 Participation of Accomplices
- Art. 22 Retroactivity of Penal laws if favorable to the accused
- Art. 45 Confiscation of instruments used in the crime
Note: When the special law adopts the penalties
imposed in the RPC i.e. penalties as reclusion
perpetua, prision correccional, etc. the provisions of
the RPC on imposition of penalties based on stages
of execution, degree of participation and attendance
of mitigating and aggravating circumstance may be
applied by necessary implication.
javascript:void(0);
-
Special Laws vs. Penal Laws
ART.11 Justifying Circumstances
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES where the act of a person is
in accordance with law such that said person is deemed not to have
violated the law.
General Rule: No criminal and civil liability incurred.
Exception: There is civil liability with respect to par. 4
where the liability is borne by persons benefited
by the act.
Par. 1 Self-defense
Elements:
1. Unlawful Aggression
- indispensable requirement
- There must be actual physical assault or aggression or
an immediate and imminent threat, which must be offensive
and positively strong.
- The defense must have been made during the existence of
aggression, otherwise, it is no longer justifying.
- While generally an agreement to fight does not constitute
unlawful aggression, violation of the terms of the agreement
to fight is considered an exception.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel
it
Test of reasonableness depends on:
(1) weapon used by aggressor
(2) physical condition, character, size and other circumstances
of aggressor
(3) physical condition, character, size and circumstances of
person defending himself
(4) place and occasion of assault
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself
NOTE: Perfect equality between the weapons used,
nor material commensurability between the means of
attack and defense by the one defending himself and
that of the aggressor is not required
REASON: the person assaulted does not have sufficient
opportunity or time to think and calculate.
Rights included in self-defense:
1. defense of person
2. defense of rights protected by law
3. defense of property (only if there is also an actual and
imminent danger on the person of the one defending)
4. defense of chastity
Kinds of Self-Defense:
1. self-defense of chastity there must be an attempt to
rape the victim
2. defense of property must be coupled with an attack on the
person of the owner, or on one entrusted with the care of
such property.
People v. Narvaez, (GR No. L-33466-67, April 20, 1983)
Attack on property alone was deemed sufficient to comply
with element of unlawful aggression.
3. self-defense in libel justified when the libel is aimed
at a persons good name.
Stand ground when in the right - the law does not require
a person to retreat when his assailant is rapidly advancing
upon him with a deadly weapon.
NOTE: Under Republic Act 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women
and Their Children Act of 2004), victim-survivors who are
found by the Courts to be suffering from Battered Woman
Syndrome (BWS) do not incur any criminal or civil liability
despite absence of the necessary elements for the justifying
circumstance of self-defense in the RPC. BWS is a
scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral
symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as
a result of cumulative abuse.
Par. 2 Defense of Relative
Elements:
1. Unlawful Aggression (indispensable requirement) 2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked,
the one making the defense had no part in such provocation.
Relative entitled to the defense:
1. spouse
2. ascendants
3. descendants
4. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or
relatives by affinity in the same degrees
5. relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree
NOTE: The relative defended may be the original
aggressor. All that is required to justify the act of the
relative defending is that he takes no part in such
provocation.
Par. 3 Defense of Stranger
Elements:
1. unlawful aggression (indispensable requirement)
2. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel it
3. person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment or
other evil motive
Par. 4 State of Necessity (Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury)
Elements:
1. evil sought to be avoided actually exists
2. injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it
3. no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it
NOTE: The necessity must not be due to the negligence or
violation of any law by the actor.
Par. 5 Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of a Right or
Office
Elements:
1. accused acted in the performance of duty or in the lawful
exercise of a right or office
2. the injury caused or offense committed be the necessary
consequence of the due performance of the duty, or the
lawful exercise of such right or office.
NOTE: The accused must prove that he was duly
appointed to the position claimed he was discharging
at the time of the commission of the offense. It must
also be shown that the offense committed was the necessary consequence of such fulfillment of duty, or
lawful exercise of a right or office.
Par. 6 Obedience to a Superior Order
Elements:
1. an order has been issued
2. order has a lawful purpose (not patently illegal)
3. means used by subordinate to carry out said order is lawful
NOTE: The superior officer giving the order cannot
invoke this justifying circumstance. Good faith is
material, as the subordinate is not liable for carrying
out an illegal order if he is not aware of its illegality
and he is not negligent.
General Rule: Subordinate cannot invoke this
circumstance when order is patently illegal.
Exception: When there is compulsion of an
irresistible force, or under impulse of
uncontrollable fear.
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xOml9EA29ok/U4oJBQjYuII/AAAAAAAAAcg/YX9GZnZl7dQ/s1600/Art.10.png
-
ART.12 Circumstances Which Exempt from Criminal Liability
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES grounds for exemption from
punishment
because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the
conditions which make the act voluntary or negligent.
Basis: The exemption from punishment is based on the complete
absence of intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the
absence of negligence on the part of the accused.
Burden of proof: Any of the circumstances is a matter of defense
and must be proved by the defendant to the satisfaction of the court.
Par. 1 Imbecility or Insanity
IMBECILE one while advanced in age has a mental development
comparable to that of children between 2 and 7 years old.
He is exempt in all cases from criminal liability.
INSANE one who acts with complete deprivation of
intelligence/reason or without the least discernment or with
total deprivation of freedom of will. Mere abnormality of the
mental faculties will not exclude imputability.
General Rule: Exempt from criminal liability
Exception: The act was done during a lucid interval.
NOTE: Defense must prove that the accused was insane at the
time of the commission of the crime because the presumption is
always in favor of sanity.
Par. 2 Under Nine Years of Age
Requisite: Offender is under 9 years of age at the time of the
commission of the crime. There is absolute criminal
irresponsibility in the case of a minor under 9
years of age.
NOTE: Under R.A. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice And Welfare Act
a minor 15 years and below is exempt from criminal liability
Par. 3 Person Over 9 and Under 15 Acting Without Discernment
NOTE: Such minor must have acted without discernment to be
exempt. If with discernment, he is criminally liable.
Presumption: The minor committed the crime without
discernment.
DISCERNMENT mental capacity to fully appreciate
the consequences of the unlawful act, which is shown by the:
1. manner the crime was committed
2. conduct of the offender after its commission
NOTE: Under R.A. 9344 a minor over 15 but but below 18 who
acted without discernment is exempt from criminal liability
Par. 4 Accident without fault or intention of causing it
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.
Par. 5 Irresistible Force
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE offender uses violence or physical force
to compel another person to commit a crime.
Elements:
1. The compulsion is by means of physical force.
2. The physical force must be irresistible.
3. The physical force must come from a third person
NOTE: Force must be irresistible so as to reduce the
individual to a mere instrument.
Par. 6 Uncontrollable Fear
UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR offender employs intimidation or threat
in compelling another to commit a crime.
DURESS use of violence or physical force
Elements:
1. 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. It promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that an
ordinary man would have succumbed to it.
NOTE: Duress to be a valid defense should be based
on real, imminent or reasonable fear for ones life or
limb. It should not be inspired by speculative, fanciful
or remote fear. A threat of future injury is not enough.
ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS Any act done
by me
against my will is not my act.
PAR 7. Insuperable Cause
INSUPERABLE CAUSE some motive, which has lawfully, morally
or physically prevented a person to do what the law commands
Elements:
1. An act is required by law to be done.
2. A person fails to perform such act.
3. His failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or
insuperable cause.
Ex:
1. A priest cant be compelled to reveal what was confessed to him.
2. No available transportation officer not liable for
arbitrary detention
3. Mother who was overcome by severe dizziness and extreme
debility, leaving child to die not liable for infanticide
(People v. Bandian, 63 Phil 530)
ABSOLUTORY CAUSES where the act committed is a crime but
for some reason of public policy and sentiment, there is no
penalty imposed. Exempting
and justifying circumstances are absolutory causes.
Examples of such other circumstances are:
1. spontaneous desistance (Art. 6)
2. accessories exempt from criminal liability (Art. 20)
3. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional
circumstances (Art. 247)
4. persons exempt from criminal liability from theft, swindling,
malicious mischief (Art 332)
5. instigation
NOTE: Entrapment is NOT an absolutory cause. A buy-bust
operation conducted in connection with
illegal drug-related offenses is a form of entrapment.
Entrapment from Instigation
1. The ways and means are resorted to for the purpose of trapping
and capturing the lawbreaker in the execution of his
criminal plan. while The Instigator practically induces the
would-be accused into the commission of the offense and
himself becomes a co-principal
2. In Entrapment, not a bar to accused prosecution and conviction
while in Instigation, Accused will be acquitted.
3. Entrapment is not an absolutoty cause while Instigation is an
absolutory cause.
ART.13 Mitigating Circumstances
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES those which if present in the
commission
of the crime reduces the penalty of the crime but does not erase
criminal liability nor change the nature of the crime
NOTE: A mitigating circumstance arising from a single fact absorbs
all the other mitigating circumstances arising from that same fact.
Par. 1 Incomplete Justifying or Exempting Circumstances
NOTE: This applies when not all the requisites are present.
If two requisites are present, it is considered a privileged
mitigating circumstance. However, in reference to Art.11(4) if
any of the last two requisites is absent, there is only an
ordinary mitigating circumstance. Remember though, that in self-
defense, defense of relative or stranger, unlawful aggression
must always be present as it is an indispensable requirement
Par. 2 Under 18 or Over 70 Years Old
NOTE: Age of accused is determined by his age at
the date of commission of crime, not date of trial.
Par. 3 No Intention to Commit so Grave a Wrong
NOTE: Can be used only when the proven facts show that there
is a notable and evident disproportion between the means
employed to execute the criminal act and its consequences.
Factors that can be considered are:
1. weapon used
2. injury inflicted
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);
-
3. part of the body injured
4. mindset of offender at the time of commission of crime
This provision addresses the intention of the offender at the
particular moment when the offender executes or commits the
criminal act, not to his intention during the planning stage
NOTE: In crimes against persons if victim does not die, the
absence of the intent to kill reduces the felony to mere
physical injuries. It is not considered as mitigating. It is
mitigating only when the victim dies.
NOTE: It is not applicable to felonies by negligence because
in felonies through negligence, the offender acts without
intent. The intent in intentional felonies is replaced by
negligence or imprudence. There is no intent on the part of
the offender, which may be considered as diminished
Par. 4 Provocation or Threat
Provocation any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
offended party, capable of exciting, inciting or
irritating anyone.
Requisites:
1. provocation must be sufficient
2. it must originate from the offended party
3. must be immediate to the commission of the crime by the
person who is provoked
NOTE: Threat should not be offensive and positively strong.
Otherwise, it would be an unlawful aggression, which may
give rise to self-defense and thus no longer a mitigating
circumstance.
Par. 5 Vindication of Grave Offense
Requisites:
1. a grave offense done to the one committing the felony, his
spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or
adopted brothers or sisters or relatives by affinity within
the same degrees
2. the felony is committed in immediate vindication of such
grave offense
NOTE: Immediate allows for a lapse of time, as long as
the offender is still suffering from the mental agony
brought about by the offense to him. (proximate time, not
just immediately after)
Par. 6 Passion or Obfuscation
Requisites:
1. offender acted upon an impulse
2. the impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produced
passion or obfuscation in him
NOTE: Act must have been committed not in the spirit of
lawlessness or revenge; act must come from lawful sentiments.
Act, Which Gave Rise To Passion And Obfuscation:
1. That there be an act, both unlawful and unjust
2. The act be sufficient to produce a condition of mind
3. That the act was proximate to the criminal act, not admitting
of time during which the perpetrator might recover his normal
equanimity
4. The victim must be the one who caused the passion or
obfuscation
NOTE: Passion and obfuscation cannot co-exist with treachery
since this means that the offender had time to ponder his
course of action.
Passion or Obfuscation from Irresistable Force
1. Passion or obfuscation is mitigating while Irresistable force
is exempting
2. Passion or Obfuscation, no physical force needed while
irresistable force requires physical force.
3. Passion and Obfuscation must come from the offender himself
while Irresistable Force must come from 3rd peson
4. Paasion or Obfuscation must come from lawful sentiments
while Irresistable force is unlawful.
Par. 7 Surrender and Confession of Guilt
WHEN SURRENDER VOLUNTARY
- must be spontaneous, showing the intent of the accused 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 in his search and capture.
NOTE: If both are present, considered as two independent
mitigating circumstances. Further mitigates penalty
NOTES:
Plea made after arraignment and after trial has begun does
not entitle accused to the mitigating circumstance
If accused pleaded not guilty, even if during arraignment,
he is entitled to mitigating circumstance as long as he
withdraws his plea of not guilty to the charge before the
fiscal could present his evidence.
Plea to a lesser charge is not a Mitigating Circumstance
because to be such, the plea of guilt must be to the
offense charged.
Plea to the offense charged in the amended info, lesser
than that charged in the original info, is Mitigating
Circumstance.
Par. 8 Physical Defect of Offender
The offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering
from some physical defect, restricting his means of action,
defense or communication with others.
NOTE: The physical defect must relate to the offense committed.
Par. 9 Illness of the Offender
Requisites:
1. The illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of
his will-power.
2. Such illness should not deprive the offender of
consciousness of his acts.
Par. 10 Similar and Analogous Circumstances
Example:
1. Defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is
similar to a case of one over 70 years old.
2. Outraged feeling of an owner of an animal taken for
ransom is analogous to vindication of grave offense.
3. Impulse of jealous feeling, similar to passion and
obfuscation.
4. Voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary
surrender.
5. Extreme poverty, similar to incomplete justification based
on state necessity.
Introduction - Aggravating Circumstances
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Those which, if attendant in the
commission of the crime, serve to have the penalty imposed in
its maximum period provided by law for the offense or those that
change the nature of the crime.
BASIS: The greater perversity of the offender manifested in the
commission of the felony as shown by: 1. the motivating power itself,
2. the place of the commission,
3. the means and ways employed
4. the time, or
5. the personal circumstances of the offender, or the offended party.
KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. Generic - those which apply to all crimes
2. Specific - those which apply only to specific crimes,
3. Qualifying - those that change the nature of the crime
4. Inherent - which of necessity accompany the commission of the
crime, therefore not considered in increasing the penalty
to be imposed
5. Special - those which arise under special conditions to
increase the penalty of the offense and cannot be offset
by mitigating circumstances
Generic Aggravating Circumstance Distinguished From Qualifying
Aggravating Circumstance
1. Generic Aggravating Circumstances - EFFECT : When not set
off by any mitigating circumstance, Increases the penalty
which should be imposed upon the accused to the maximum
period but without exceeding the limit prescribed by law
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstance - EFFECT: Gives the crime
its proper and exclusive name and places the author of the
crime in such a situation as to deserve no other penalty
than that specially prescribed by law for said crimes
(People v. Bayot, 64Phil269, 273)
2. Generic Aggravating Circumstances - If not alleged in the
information, a qualifying aggravating circumstance will be
considered generic
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);
-
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances - To be considered
as such, MUST be alleged in the information.
3. Generic Aggravating Circumstances - May be offset by a
mitigating circumstance.
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances - Cannot be offset by a
mitigating circumstance.
RULES ON AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. Aggravating circumstances shall NOT be appreciated if:
a) They constitute a crime specially punishable by law, or
b) It is included by the law in defining a crime with a penalty
prescribed, and therefore shall not be taken into account
for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
Ex: That the crime be committed by means of ...fire,...
explosion (Art. 14, par. 12) is in itself a crime of arson
(Art. 321) or a crime involving destruction (Art. 324). It
is not to be considered to increase the penalty for the
crime of arson or for the crime involving destruction.
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating
circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof
(Art.62, par.2)
3. Aggravating circumstances which arise:
a) From the moral attributes of the offender;
b) From his private relations with the offended party; or
c) From any personal cause,
shall only serve to aggravate the liability of the
principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such
circumstances and a attendant. (Art.62, par. 3)
4. The circumstances which consist :
a) In the material execution of the act, or
b) In the means employed to accomplish it,
shall serve to aggravate the liability of only those
persons who had knowledge of them at the time
of the execution of the act or their cooperation
therein. Except when there is proof of conspiracy
in which case the act of one is deemed to be the
act of all, regardless of lack of knowledge of the
facts constituting the circumstance. (Art. 62, par.4)
5. Aggravating circumstances, regardless of its kind, should
be specifically alleged in the information AND proved as
fully as the crime itself in order to increase the penalty.
(Sec. 9, Rule 110, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure)
6. When there is more than one qualifying aggravating
circumstance present, one of them will be appreciated as
qualifying aggravating while the others will be considered
as generic aggravating.
ART.14 Aggravating Circumstances
Par. 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public
position
Requisites:
1. Offender is public officer
2. Public officer must use the influence, prestige, or
ascendancy which his office gives him as means to
realize criminal purpose
It is not considered as an aggravating circumstance where
taking advantage of official position is made by law an
integral element of the crime or inherent in the offense,
Ex: malversation (Art. 217), falsification of a document
committed by public officers (Art. 171).
When the public officer did not take advantage of
the influence of his position, this aggravating
circumstance is not present
NOTE : Taking advantage of a public position is
also inherent in the case of accessories under
Art. 19, par. 3 (harboring, concealing, or assisting
in the escape of the principal of the crime), and in
crimes committed by public officers (Arts. 204-245).
Par. 2. That the crime be committed in contempt of or with
insult to public authorities
Requisites:
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.
PERSON IN AUTHORITY public authority, or person who is
directly vested with jurisdiction and has the power to
govern and execute the laws
Ex:
1. Governor
2. Mayor
3. Barangay captain/ chairman
4. Councilors
5. Government agents
6. Chief of Police
NOTE: A teacher or professor of a public or recognized
private school is not a public authority within the
contemplation of this paragraph. While he is a person
in authority under Art. 152, that status is only for
purposes of Art. 148 (direct assault) and Art.
152 (resistance and disobedience)
The crime should not be committed against the public authority (otherwise it will constitute direct assault
under Art.148) This is NOT applicable when committed
in the presence of a mere agent.
AGENT subordinate public officer charged w/ the
maintenance of public order and protection and
security of life and property
Ex: barrio vice lieutenant, barrio councilman
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
Rules regarding par 3(1):
1. These circumstances shall only be considered as one
aggravating circumstance.
2. Rank, age, sex may be taken into account only in
crimes against persons or honor, they cannot be
invoked in crimes against property.
3. It must be shown that in the commission of the crime
the offender deliberately intended to offend or
insult the sex, age and rank of the offended party.
RANK The designation or title of distinction used to
fix the relative position of the offended party in
reference to others (There must be a difference in the
social condition of the offender and the offended party).
AGE may refer to old age or the tender age of the victim.
SEX refers to the female sex, not to the male sex.
The AC 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.
(Ex: in parricide, abduction, seduction and rape)
People vs. Lapaz, March 31, 1989
Disregard of sex and age are not absorbed in treachery because treachery refers to the manner of the commission
of the crime, while disregard of sex and age pertains
to the relationship of the victim.
DWELLING must be a building or structure exclusively
used for rest and comfort (combination of house and store
not included), may be temporary as in the case of guests
in a house or bedspacers. It includes dependencies, the
foot of the staircase and the enclosure under the house
NOTES:
The aggravating circumstance of dwelling requires that
the crime be wholly or partly committed therein or in
any integral part thereof.
Dwelling does not mean the permanent residence or
domicile of the offended party or that he must be the
owner thereof. He must, however, be actually living or
dwelling therein even for a temporary duration or purpose.
It is not necessary that the accused should have actually
entered the dwelling of the victim to commit the offense;
javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);javascript:void(0);
-
it is enough that the victim was attacked inside his own
house, although the assailant may have devised means to
perpetrate the assault from without.
What aggravates the commission of the crime in
ones dwelling:
1. The abuse of confidence which the offended party reposed
in the offender by opening the door to him; or
2. 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 circumstance
of dwelling:
The provocation must be:
1. Given by the owner of the dwelling,
2. Sufficient, and
3. Immediate to the commission of the crime.
NOTE: If all these conditions are present, the offended
party is deemed to have given the provocation, and the
fact that the crime is committed in the dwelling 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 own house
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 same is aggravating.
However, if the paramour also dwells
in the conjugal dwelling, the applicable
aggravating circumstance is abuse of
confidence.
2. When robbery is committed by the use of force upon
things, dwelling is not aggravating because it is
inherent.
However, dwelling is aggravating in robbery with
violence against or intimidation of persons because
this class of robbery can be committed without the
necessity of trespassing the sanctity of the
offended partys house.
3. In the crime needed to see this picture. dwelling,
it is inherent or included by law in defining the
crime.
4. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and
immediate provocation.
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
There are two aggravating circumstances present under
par.4 which must be independently appreciated if present
in the same case
While one may be related to the other in the factual
situation in the case, they cannot be lumped together.
Abuse of confidence requires a special confidential
relationship between the offender and the victim, while this is not required for there to be obvious
ungratefulness
Requisites Of Abuse Of Confidence:
1. 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 abuse of confidence facilitated the
commission of the crime.
NOTE: Abuse of confidence is inherent in malversation
(Art. 217), qualified theft (Art. 310), estafa by
conversion or misappropriation (Art. 315), and qualified
seduction (Art. 337).
Requisites of obvious ungratefulness:
1. 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.
NOTE: The ungratefulness contemplated by par. 4 must be
such clear and manifest ingratitude on the part of
the accused.
Par. 5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief
Executive, or in his presence, or where public
authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties,
or in a place dedicated to religious worship.
Actual performance of duties is not necessary when crime
is committed in the palace or in the presence of the
Chief Executive
Requisites Regarding Public Authorities:
1. crime occurred in the public office
2. public authorities are actually performing their
public duties
Requisites (Place Dedicated To Religious Worship):
1. The crime occurred in a place dedicated to the
worship of God regardless of religion
2. The offender must have decided to commit the crime
when he entered the place of worship
Except for the third which requires that official functions are being performed at the time of the
commission of the crime, the other places mentioned 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 as place dedicated to the worship of God.
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
NOTE: 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 facilitated the commission of the crime; or
2. When especially sought for by the offender to insure
the commission of the crime or for the purpose of
impunity; or
3. When the offender took advantage thereof for the
purpose of impunity
NIGHTTIME (obscuridad) that period of darkness
beginning at the end of dusk and ending at dawn.
Commission of the crime must begin and be accomplished
in the nighttime. When the place of the crime is
illuminated by light, nighttime is not aggravating.
It is not considered aggravating when the crime
began at daytime.
Nighttime is not especially sought for when the notion
to commit the crime was conceived of shortly before
commission or when crime was committed at night upon a
casual encounter
However, nighttime need not be specifically sought for
when
(1) it facilitated the commission of the offense, or
(2) the offender took advantage of the same to
commit the crime
A bare statement that crime was committed at night is insufficient. The information must allege that nighttime
was sought for or taken advantage of, or that it
facilitated the crime
GENERAL RULE: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery.
EXCEPTION: Where both the treacherous mode of attack and
nocturnity were deliberately decided upon in the same case,
they can be considered separately if such circumstances
have different factual bases. Thus:
In People vs. Berdida, et. al. (June 30, 1966),
nighttime was considered since it was purposely sought,
and treachery was further appreciated because the
victims hands and arms were tied together before he
was beaten up by the accused.
In People vs. Ong, et. al. (Jan. 30, 1975), there was
treachery as the victim was stabbed while lying face
up and defenseless, and nighttime was considered upon
proof that it facilitated the commission of the offense
and was taken advantage of by the accused.
javascript:void(0);
-
UNINHABITED PLACE (despoblado) one where there are no
houses at all, a place at a considerable distance from
town, where the houses are scattered at a great distance
from each other
Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal
purpose
What should be considered here is whether in the
place of the commission of the offense, there was
a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving
some help.
BAND (en cuadrilla) whenever there are more than 3 armed
malefactors that shall have acted together in the commission
of an offense
NOT E: There must be four or more armed men
If one of the four-armed malefactors is a principal
by inducement, they do not form a band because
it is undoubtedly connoted that he had no direct
participation.
By a band is aggravating in crimes against property or
against persons or in the crime of illegal detention or
treason but does not apply to crimes against chastity
By a band is inherent in brigandage
This aggravating circumstance is absorbed in the
circumstance of abuse of superior strength
Par. 7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a
conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or
other
calamity or misfortune.
Requisites:
1. The crime was committed when there was a calamity or
misfortune
2. The offender took advantage of the state of confusion
or chaotic condition from such misfortune
If the offended was PROVOKED by the offended party
during the calamity/misfortune, this aggravating
circumstance may not be taken into consideration.
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 availed himself of their aid
or relied upon them when the crime was committed
NOTE: This aggravating circumstance requires that the armed
men are accomplices who take part in a minor capacity
directly or indirectly, and not when they were merely
present at the crime scene. Neither should they constitute
a band, for then the proper aggravating circumstance
would be cuadrilla.
When This Aggravating Circumstance Shall Not Be Considered:
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 same purpose. 3. When the others were only casually present and the
offender did not avail himself of any of their aid or
when he did not knowingly count upon their assistance
in the commission of the crime
If there are four armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed
in employment of a band. If there are three armed men or
less, aid of armed men may be the aggravating circumstance.
Aid of armed men includes armed women.
Par. 9. That the accused is a recidivist
RECIDIVIST one who at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the same title
of the RPC.
Requisites:
1. That the offender is on trial for an offense;
2. That he was previously convicted by final judgment
of another crime;
3. That both the first and the second offenses are
embraced in the same title 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. It is meant to include
everything that is done in the course of the trial, from
arraignment until after sentence is announced by the
judge in open court.
What is controlling is the TIME OF THE TRIAL,
not the time of the commission of the offense.
GENERAL RULE: To prove recidivism, it is necessary to
allege the same in the information and to attach thereto
certified copy of the sentences rendered against the accused.
Exception: If the accused does not object and when he
admits in his confession and on the witness stand.
Recidivism must be taken into account no matter
how many years have intervened between the
first and second felonies.
Amnesty extinguishes the penalty and its effects.
However, pardon does not obliterate the fact that
the accused was a recidivist. Thus, even if the
accused was granted a pardon for the first
offense but he commits another felony embraced
in the same title of the Code, the first conviction
is still counted to make him a recidivist
Being an ordinary aggravating circumstance,
recidivism affects only the periods of a penalty,
except in prostitution and vagrancy (Art. 202) and
gambling (PD 1602) wherein recidivism increases
the penalties by degrees. No other generic
aggravating circumstance produces this effect
In recidivism it is sufficient that the succeeding
offense be committed after the commission of the
preceding offense provided that at the time of his
trial for the second offense, the accused had
already been convicted of the first offense.
If both offenses were committed on the same date,
they shall be considered as only one, hence, they
cannot be separately counted in order to constitute
recidivism. Also, judgments of convicted handed down
on the same day shall be considered as only one
conviction.
REASON: Because the Code requires that to be
considered as a separate convictions, at the time of
his trial for one crime the accused shall have
been previously convicted by final judgment of the other.
Par. 10. That the offender has been previously punished for
an
offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater
penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches
a
lighter penalty.
Requisites Of Reiteracion Or 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 an
a) Equal or
b) Greater penalty, or
c) For two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty than that for the new offense; and
3. That he is convicted of the new offense
Habituality vs Recidivism
1. As To The First offense
Habituality - It is necessary that the offender shall
shall have served out his sentence for the first
offense.
Recidivism - It is enough that a final judgment has
been rendered in the first offense.
2. As to the kind of offenses involved
Habituality - The previous and subsequent offenses must
not be embraced in the same title of the code.
Recidivism - Requires that the offenses be included
in the same title of the code.
THE FOUR FORMS OF REPETITION ARE:
1. Recidivism (par. 9, Art. 14) Where a person, on
separate occasions, is convicted of two offenses
embraced in the same title in the RPC. This is a
generic aggravating circumstance.
2. Reiteracion or Habituality (par. 10, Art. 14)
javascript:void(0);
-
Where the offender has been previously punished for
an offense to which the law attaches an equal or
greater penalty or for two crimes to which it attaches
a lighter penalty. This is a generic aggravating
circumstance.
3. Multi-recidivism or Habitual delinquency (Art.
62, par, 5) Where a person within a period of ten
years from the date of his release or last conviction of
the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of
the said crimes a third time or oftener. This is an
extraordinary aggravating circumstance.
4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) Where a person
commits felony before beginning to serve or while
serving sentence on a previous conviction for a
felony. This is a special aggravating circumstance.
Since reiteracion provides that the accused has duly
served the sentence for his previous conviction/s, or
is legally considered to have done so, quasi-recidivism
cannot at the same time constitute reiteracion,
hence this aggravating circumstance cannot apply
to a quasi-recidivist.
If the same set of facts constitutes recidivism and
reiteracion, the liability of the accused should be
aggravated by recidivism which can easily be proven.
Par. 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of
price,
reward or promise.
Requisites:
1. There are at least 2 principals:
- The principal by inducement (one who offers)
- The principal by direct participation (accepts)
2. The price, reward, or promise should be previous to
and in consideration of the commission of the
criminal act
NOTE: The circumstance is applicable to both principals.
It affects the person who received the price / reward as
well as the person who gave it.
If without previous promise it was given voluntarily after
the crime had been committed asan expression of his
appreciation for the sympathy and 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 material things or that the same were actually delivered,
it being sufficient that the offer made by the principal
by inducement be accepted by the principal by direct
participation before the commission of the offense.
The inducement must be the primary consideration for the
commission of the crime.
Par. 12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation,
fire,
explosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional damage
thereto,
derailment of a locomotive, or by use of any artifice
involving
great waste and ruin
The circumstances under this paragraph will only be considered
as aggravating if and when they are used by the offender as a
means to accomplish a criminal purpose
When another aggravating circumstance already qualifies the crime, any of these aggravating circumstances shall be
considered as generic aggravating circumstance only
When used as a means to kill another person, the crime is
qualified to murder.
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; and
3. A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and
execution, to allow him to reflect upon the consequences
of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the
resolution of his will.
Essence of premeditation: The execution of the criminal act
must be preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the
resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space
of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment.
To establish evident premeditation, it must be shown that there
was a period sufficient to afford full opportunity for
meditation and reflection, a time adequate to allow the
conscience to overcome the resolution of the will, as well as
outward acts showing the intent to kill. It must be shown that
the offender had sufficient time to reflect upon the
consequences of his act but still persisted in his determination
to commit the crime. (PEOPLE vs. SILVA, et. al., GR No.
140871, August 8, 2002)
Premeditation is absorbed by reward or promise.
When the victim is different from that intended, premeditation
is not aggravating. However, if the offender premeditated on
the killing of any person, it is proper to consider against
the offender the aggravating circumstance of premeditation,
because whoever is killed by him is contemplated in his
premeditation.
Par. 14. That (1) craft,
(2) fraud, or
(3) disguise be employed.
Requisite
The offender must have actually used craft, fraud, or disguise
to facilitate the commission of the crime.
CRAFT (astucia) involved the use of intellectual trickery or
cunning on the part of the accused. A chicanery resorted to
by the accused to aid in the execution of his criminal design.
It is employed as a scheme in the execution of the crime
FRAUD (fraude) insidious words or machinations used to induce
the victim to act in a manner which would enable the offender
to carry out his design
Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery ifthey have been
deliberately adopted as the means, methods or forms for the
treacherous strategy, or they may co-exist independently where
they are adopted for a different purpose in the commission
of the crime.
Ex:
In People vs. San Pedro (Jan. 22, 1980),
where the accused pretended to hire the driver in order to
get his vehicle, it was held that there was craft directed
to the theft of the vehicle, separate from the means
subsequently used to treacherously kill the defenseless
driver.
In People vs. Masilang (July 11, 1986)
there was also craft where after hitching a ride, the accused
requested the driver to take them to a place to visit somebody,
when in fact they had already planned to kill the driver.
DISGUISE (disfraz) resorting to any device to conceal identity
The test of disguise is whether the device or contrivance
resorted to by the 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
constitutes disguise.
Par. 15. That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or
(2) means be employed to weaken the defense.
Par. 15 contemplates two aggravating circumstances, either of
which qualifies a killing to murder.
MEANING OF advantage be taken:To deliberately use excessive
force that is out of proportion to the means for self-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.
TEST for abuse of superior strength: the relative strength of
the offender and his victim and whether or not he took
advantage of his greater strength.
When there are several offenders participating in the crime,
they must ALL be principals by direct participation and their
attack against the victim must be concerted and intended
to be so.
-
Abuse of superior strength is inherent in the crime of
parricide where the husband kills the wife. It is generally
accepted that the husband is physically stronger than the wife.
Abuse of superior strength is also present when the offender
uses a weapon which is out of proportion to the defense
available to the offended party.
NOTE: Abuse of superior strength absorbs cuadrilla (band).
MEANING OF Means employed to weaken defense - the offender
employs means that materially weaken the resisting power of
the offended party.
Ex:
1. Where one, struggling with another, suddenly throws a
cloak over the head 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 upon the latter eyes and then wounds or kills him.
3. When the offender, who had the intention to kill the
victim, made the deceased intoxicated, thereby materially
weakening the latters resisting power.
NOTE: This circumstance is applicable only to crimes against
persons, and sometimes against person and property, such as
robbery with physical injuries or homicide.
Par. 16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia)
TREACHERY when the offender commits any of the crimes
against
the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution
thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution without risk to himself arising from the defense
which the offended party might make.
Requisites:
1. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a
position to defend himself; and
2. That the offender consciously adopted the particular means,
method or form of attack employed by him.
TEST: It is not only the relative position of the parties but,
more specifically, whether or not the victim was forewarned or