CRIMINAL LAW 1
ACT NO. 3815
EFFECTIVITY - JANUARY 1, 1932
BOOK 1- PRINCIPLES AFFECTING THE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
BOOK 2- DEFINITION OF CRIMES AND ITS ELEMENTS AND CORRESPONDING
PENALTIES
CRIMINAL LAW
Branch or division of law with defines crimes, treat of their nature and provide for their punishment.
CRIME is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it.
Sources of PHILIPPINE CRIM LAW
1. RPC ACT NO 3815
2. Special penal laws passed by the Congress
3. Presidential Decress
The State has the authority, under its Police Power to define and punish crimes and lay
down the rules of criminal procedures.
LIMITATIONS ON THE POWER OF THE LAWMAKING BODY TO ENACT PENAL
LEGISLATIONS. (Bill of Rights of the 1987 Phil Constitution)
1. No ex post Facto law or bill of attainder shall be passed or enacted, Art 3, sec 22 (eg.
Anti-hazing law) case of Leni Villa
2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law,
Art 3, sec 14
CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL
LAW
1. GENERAL – CRIM LAW is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in the
Philippine Territory
The killing of Jennifer Laude on Oct 11, 2014 in Olongapo City, a 26 yr old trans
was drowned to death by Joseph Scott Pemberton, a 19 year old Lance Corporal in
the US Marine Corps
2. TERRITORIAL – CRIM LAW undertake to punish crimes committed within the
Philippine Territory a.k.a “PRINCIPLE OF TERRITORIALITY”
Terrestrial/Fluvial/Aerial Domains
3. PROSPECTIVE – CRIM LAW cannot make an
act punishable in a manner in which it was not
punishable when committed. (eg. Death Penalty vs
Reclusion Perpetua)
ART 1. Time when act takes effect
TWO theories of CRIM LAW
1. CLASSICAL THEORY basis of criminal liability is human free
will and the purpose of penalty is retribution and that man is
essentially a moral creature with an absolute free will to choose
between good and evil
2. POSITIVIST THEORY that man is subdued occasionally by a
strange phenomenon which constrain him to do wrong even
contrary to his will.
ART 2 APPLICATION OF ITS
PROVISIONS
The provision of this code shall be enforced not only in within the Philippine Archipelago, including its
atmosphere, territorial waters and maritime zone but also outside of its jurisdiction against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on the Philippine ship or airship
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines or obligation and securities
issued by the Government of the Philippines
3. should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these Island of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the preceding number
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 (eg. Treason and piracy)
FELONIES AND CIRCUMSTANCES
AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
ART 3 Acts and omission punishable by law are FELONIES(delitos)
Two kinds of FELONY:
1. DECEIT(Dolo) or INTENTIONAL FELONY- when the act is performed with deliberate
INTENT or malicious INTENT
A took the watch of B with intent to gain and without the consent of B. The act of taking the
watch of B, with intent to gain, constitute the crime of Theft
Requisite of DOLO or MALICE
[Link] -while doing an act or omission – when a person acts with freedom he is no
longer a human being but a tool. His liability is as much as that of the knife that wounds, a
torch that set fire or a key that opens a door
2. INTELLIGENCE- without this power, no crime can
exists. That an IMBECILE or INSANE and INFANT UNDER
9 YRS OLD acting without discernment, have no criminal
liability because they acted without INTELLIGENCE.
3. INTENT – Intentional to commit an act with malicious
intent. That includes Planning in the commission of an
offense.
MISTAKE OF FACT is a misapprehension
of fact on the part of the person who
caused injury to another.
While ignorance of the law excuses no one from liability, but mistake of fact relieves the accuse from criminal
liability OR AN HONEST MISTAKE OF FACTS DESTROYS THE PRESUMPTION OF CRIMINAL
LIABILITY. US vs. AH CHONG, 15 phil reports 488
FACTS: Ah Chong was a cook at McKinley Hill. He was afraid of bad elements. One evening, before going to
bed, he locked himself in a room by placing a chair in the door. After having gone to bed, he was awakened by
someone trying to open the door. He called out twice, “who is there”? But received no answer. Fearing that the
intruder is a robber, he leaped from his bed and called out again.
“If you enter the room I will kill you”. But at that precise moment, he was struck by the that had been
placed in the door, and believing that he was being attacked he seized a kitchen knife and fatally
wounded who turned out to be his roommate.
ISSUE: Is the accused (Ah Chong) guilty of the crime of Homicide under the RPC?
RULLING/HELD: There is an innocent mistake of fact without any fault or carelessness on the part of
the accused because having no time or opportunity to make inquiry and being pressed by circumstances
to act immediately, the accused had no alternative but to take the facts as they then appeared to him, and
such facts justified his act of killing the deceased(his roommate) also applies in the instant case the
DOCTRINE of SELF DEFENSE.
ERROR IN PERSONAE OR MISTAKE IN
THE IDENTITY OF A PERSON IS
DIFFERENT FROM A MISTAKE OF
FACT
PEOPLE vs. OANIS (74 Phil report 257)
Chief of Police OANIS and his co-accused Corporal GALANTA were under
instructions to arrest one BALAGTAS, a notorious criminal and escaped convict,
and empowered OANIS and GALANTA to get BALAGTAS dead or alive.
Proceeding to the suspected house, they went into a room and on seeing a man
sleeping with his back toward the door, simultaneously fired at him believing it
was BALAGTAS, without first making any reasonable inquiry as to his identity.
The victim turned out to be an innocent man, the brother of the notorious criminal
Both accused are guilty of MURDER
Mala in se vs Mala Prohibita
Mala in Se or wrongful from their nature or crimes punishable by the RPC
or more serious in their effects on society.
Examples………
Mala Prohibita are violations prohibited by law or statue passed by
the Congress of the Philippines.
Examples……..
2. FAULT(Culpa) or CULPABLE FELONY- when the wrongful act
results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skills.
Unintentional act or without malice.
ART 4. Criminal Liability
Criminal Liability shall be incurred:
1. by any person committing a felony(delito) although the wrongful act done be
different from that which he intended
2. by any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or
property, were not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on
account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME The commission of IMPOSSIBLE CRIME is indicative of
criminal propensity or criminal tendency of one person.
REQUISITES OF IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
1. That the act performed would be an offense against person or property
2. that the act was done with evil intent
3. that the act performed is in violation of RPC
Crimes against PERSON ( Parricide, Murder, Homicide, Infanticide, Abortion,
Physical Injuries and Rape
Crimes against PROPERTY ( Robbery, Theft, Arson, Brigandage, Swindling,
Usurpation and Culpable Insolvency )
ART 6. Consummated, Frustrated and
Attempted Felonies (Stages of Execution)
Consummated Felony – when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present.
Frustrated Felony – when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony
as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of some cause independent to the
will of the perpetrator.
Attempted Felony – when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by OVERT
ACTS, and does not perform all the acts of execution which would produce a felony by reason of some
cause or accident.
EG. MR A. shoot MR B using a Gun.
If Mr B is not wounded or missed the shooting of Mr A – ATTEMPTED
If Mr B is wounded (fatal/serious) but alive after the shooting of Mr A – FRUSTRATED
If Mr B died and killed after the shooting of Mr A - CONSUMMATED
OVERT ACTS (Potentially be used as
evidence in a case)
Is a physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to commit a crime more
than a mere planning or preparation.
Is an OPEN ACT that can be clearly proved by evidence.
ART 7. Light Felonies are infraction of
laws for the commission of which the
penalty of ARRESTO MENOR or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos or both is
provided.
Light felonies punished by RPC
1. Slight Physical Injuries ART 266
2. Theft ART 309
3. Alteration of Boundary Marks ART 313
4. Malicious Mischief ART 328
5. Intriguing Against Honor ART 364
ART 8. CONSPIRACY and PROPOSAL
to COMMIT FELONY
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in
which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when 2 or more persons come to an agreement concerning the
commission of a felony and decided to commit it.
Note: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a crime are only preparatory acts, and
the law regards them as innocence or at least permissible
Eg. MR A proposed acts of sedition to MR B
Question: What crime is Committed? None. Because proposal to commit sedition
is NOT a Crime. But if MR B accept the proposal, there will be conspiracy to commit
sedition as a crime punishable by RPC
ART 9. GRAVE FELONIES, LESS
GRAVE FELONIES AND LIGHT
FELONIES
Grave offense are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties
Less Grave Felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their
maximum period are correctional
Light Felonies are those infraction of law for the commission of which the penalty of
ARRESTO MENOR or a fine not exceeding to 200 pesos or both is provided.
PENALTIES
Capital Punishment Death Penalty
Afflictive Penalty Reclusion Perpetua 12 yrs & 1 day to 40 yrs
Reclusion Temporal 12 yrs & 1 day to 20 yrs
Perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification
Perpetual or temporary special
disqualification
Prison Mayor
6 yrs & 1 day to 20 yrs
PENALTIES
Correctional Penalties Prision Correctional 6 mos. & 1 day to 6 yr
Arresto Mayor 1 Day to 6 mos
Destierro ( Restriction of Freedom )
Suspension ( Public Office )
PENALTIES
Light Penalties Arresto Menor 1 day to 30 days
Other Penalties Fine
Suspension from Public Office, Right to vote and
be voted
Imdemnification
Forfieture or Confiscation
CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING
CRIMINAL LIABILITY
JUSTIFYING those where the act of a person is said to be in
accordance with law and is free from criminal liability
EXEMPTING are those grounds for exemption from punishment
because there is wanting in the crime of the conditions which make the act
voluntary or negligent
MITIGATING are those do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability but
serve only to reduce the penalty
AGGRAVATING are those which serves to increase the penalty based on the
greater perversity of the offender
ALTERNATIVE are those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating
or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime
ART 11 JUSTIFYING
CIRCUMSTANCES
The ff do not incur criminal liability
1. Anyone who act in defense of his persons or rights provided the ff
circumstances concur:
A. Unlawful aggression
B. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it
C. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
himself
What is SELF-DEFENSE?
UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION- is equivalent to assault of immediate
and
imminent kind
UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
There is unlawful aggression when the peril to ones life, limb or right is either
actual or imminent. There must be actual physical force or actual use of weapon
BUT: THE FULFILLMENT OF A DUTY IN A MORE OR LESS VIOLENT
MANNER IS AN AGGRESSION or act or offenses sanctioned under
ART 247 of the RPC “ Any legally married person who having surprised his
spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another
person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or shall inflict upon them
any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of DESTIERRO
LAWFUL.(People vs Merced, 39 phil 198)
Attempt to rape a woman – defend of rights to person.
Thus, embracing a woman, touching her private parts and her breasts, and throwing
her on the grounds for the purpose of raping her in an inhabited place constitute an
attack against her honor and therefore an UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION. People vs.
Dela Cruz. 61 phil 344
Defense of Property
Violent entry to another’s house at nighttime, by a person armed with bolo and
forcing his way into the house, shows he was ready and looking for trouble and the
manner of entry constitute an act of UNLAWFUL AGGRESION. People vs
Mirabiles 45 OG 277
There is self- defense even if the aggressor used a toy pistol, provided the accused
believed it was a real gun. Similar resemblance to a real toy gun and believe that
the real gun was being aimed at him. People vs. Boral, 11 CA 914
Example of reasonable necessity:
When the husband of the accused was kneeling over her as she lay on her back on
the ground and his hand chocking her neck when she pulled out the knife inserted
at the left side of her husband belt and plunged it at his body hitting the left back
portion just below the waist. People vs Caballero 61, SCRA 180
The use of a GUN against an aggressor armed with a BOLO was held reasonable,
it appearing that the deceased was advancing upon the accused and within a few
feet of striking distance when the latter shot him. US vs MACK 8 phil 701
Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
Note! The provocation must be sufficient or the act of aggression must be
adequate to its commission.
EXAMPLE: Thus, to engage in a verbal and heated argument cannot be
considered sufficient provocation. It is necessary for the provocation to be
sufficient that the one who gave it must have been guilty of using VIOLENCE.
People vs Valencia 133 SCRA 86
Accused FATHER and SON the victim. Son challenge his father to fight and
he(SON) will kill his father when he came out. When the FATHER came out, he
threw a stone to him(SON)
Reasonable Necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the crime
Lack of Sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, ascendance,
descendants or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters or of his relatives by
affinity in the same degrees and those by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or right of a STRANGER
Relatives that can be defended:
Spouse
Ascendants and Descendants
Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sister
Relatives by blood or consanguinity within the Fourth civil degree
note: Relatives by affinity, because of marriage are parents-in-law, son or daughter-
in-law and brother or sister-in-law
Consanguinity refers to blood relatives. Brothers and sisters are second degree. Uncle
and niece or aunts and nephew are third degree and first cousins are fourth degree.
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which causes
damage to another provided that. A. that the evil sought to be avoided actually
exists B. that the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it C. that there be
no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it
5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a
right or office
6. any person who acts in the obedience to an order issued by a superior for some
lawful purpose
EVIL SOUGHT TO BE AVOIDED ACTUALLY EXISTS
The killing of a fetus to save the life of a mother is held justified because of this.
THAT THE INJURY FEARED BE GREATER THAN THAT DONE TO AVOID
IT
A person driving a car on a narrow road with due diligence when suddenly he saw
a 6x6 truck in front of his car. If he would swerve his car to the left, he would fall
into a narrow and edge mountainous place with no barricades on the side, or if
would swerve to the right, he would kill a passerby. He was forced to choose
between losing his life or the life of an innocent person. He choose his life, ran
over and killed the passer-by.
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES are those grounds for exemption from
punishment based on the complete absence of intelligence, freedom of action or
intent and therefore do not incur any criminal liability.
ART 12.
EXEMPTINGCIRCUMSTANCES
The ff are exempt from criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a
lucid interval
When an imbecile or an insane person has committed an act
which the law defines as a felony, the court shall order his confinement
in one of the hospital or asylums established for persons thus affected.
2. A person under nine years of age
3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has acted
with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be proceeded against
in accordance with ART 80 of this code
Distinction between IMBECILE and INSANITY
IMBECILE is one who, while advanced in age, has a mental development
comparable to that of children between 2 and 7 yrs of age. (EXEMPT FROM
CRIMINAL LIABILITY)
INSANITY exists when there is complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing the ac, deprive of reason, and acted without discernment
(EXEMPTED FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY). But not exempted during the
LUCID INTERVAL.
Kleptomania when he committed the crime of theft is either exempting or
mitigated. Must be investigated by competent Psychiatrists to determine the
impulse to steal is irresistible or not. IF HIS ACT IS DUE TO HIS MENTAL
DISEASE OR DEFECT IS STILL EMBRACED IN THE TERM INSANITY.
Epilepsy is a chronic disease characterized by occurring disease at intervals,
attended by convulsive motions of the muscles and loss of consciousness. CASE:
People vs Mancao 49 phil 887
Where the accused claimed that he was an epileptic but it was NOT shown
that he was epileptic when he committed the crime, he is not exempt from criminal
liability.
FEEBLEMINDEDNESS is not Imbecility People vs Formigones it was held that
feeblemindedness is nor EXEMPTING, because the offender could distinguish
right from wrong
Committing a crime while in a DREAM or SOMNAMBULISM or Sleep walking
One who, while sleeping, suddenly got up, got a BOLO, and upon meeting his wife
who tried to stop him, wounded her and also attacked other persons, is not criminally
liable, it appearing that the act was committed while in a dream. People vs. Taneo 58
Phil 255
Person under 9 years of age or 9 years or less
An infant under 9 years old is presumed is incapable of committing a crime and this is
ABSOLUTE which cannot be overcome by any evidence.
Under the RPC, life of Human Being is divided into 4 periods:
1. The age of absolute irresponsibility - 9 years and below (Infancy)
2. The age of conditional responsibility – between 9 to 15 years
3. The age of full responsibility – 18 years or over (adolescence)
4. The age of mitigated responsibility – over 70 years old (Senility or stage of
weaknesses by reason of old age)
A person over 9 years of age and under 15, unless he acted with discernment in
which case, such minor shall be proceeded in accordance with Art 80 of RPC
Discernment is a mental capacity of a minor age between 9 and 15 years of age to
fully appreciate the consequences of his act.
Art 80 Suspension of Sentence of Minor Delinquents – Whenever a Minor of
either sex at the date of the commission of the crime, the court shall commit such
minor to the custody or care of a public or private benevolent or charitable
institutions of the care, correction or education of the orphaned or the custody or
care of any other responsible persons subject to the supervision of DSWD until
such minor shall have reached the majority age .
when such minor is adjudge to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in
conformity with the provisions of this act, shall commit him to the care and
custody of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and
education; otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some institution.
4. any persons who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it
5. any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force
6. any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an
equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act, when preventive by some lawful
or insuperable cause
What is an ACCIDENT? Or foreseen event Is something that happens outside the
sway of our will that lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences.
The accused, while hunting saw a wild chicken and fired a shot. After hitting a
wild chicken, recoiled and struck the tenant who was a relative of the accused.
The man who was injured died.
Ruling: if the life was taken by misfortune or accident while the accused is in the
performance of lawful act executed with due care and without intention of doing
harm, there is no criminal liability People vs Tanedo 15 phil 196
Person who acts under compulsion of an irresistible force
DURESS refers to a situation whereby a person performs an act as a result of
violence, threat or other pressure against a person
FEAR a belief that someone or something is dangerous which likely to cause pain
INTIMIDATION frighten or threaten someone, usually in order to do something
he/she does not wish to do.
Person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some
lawful and insuperable causes
INSUPERABLE CAUSES are those where the act committed is a crime but for
some reasons of public policy and sentiments there is no penalty thereof.
Mr. A confessed to a Filipino Priest that he and several others were in conspiracy
in committing rebellion against the Government. Under ART 116, a Filipino
citizen who knows of such conspiracy must report the same to the Governor,
Mayor or Fiscal of the Province where he resides. If the PRIEST does not disclose
and make known the same to the proper authority, he is exempt from criminal
liability.
Under the law, the PRIEST cannot be compelled to reveal any information which
he came to know by reason of the confession made to him in his professional
capacity.
A mother who at the time of childbirth was overcome by severe dizziness and
extreme debility and left the child in a thicket where the said child died is not
liable for infanticide. Because it was physically impossible for her to take home
the child. The severe dizziness and extreme debility of the woman constitute
INSUPERABLE CAUSE.
Mitigating circumstance are those which, if
present in the commission of the crime, do
not entirely free the actor from criminal
liability, but serves only to reduce the penalty.
The ff are mitigating circumstances:
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to
exempt from the criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant
2. That the offender is under 18 years old or over 70 years old. In the case of a minor, he shall be
proceeded against in accordance with the provision of art 80
Note:
• Under 9 years of age, exempting circumstance
• Over 9 and under 15 years of age, also an exempting circumstance
• Under 18 years old, mitigating circumstance
• 18 years or over, full criminal liability
• 70 years or over mitigating circumstance, no imposition of death penalty
3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed
4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party
5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave
offense to the committing the felony, his spouse, ascendance,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to
have produced passion or obfuscation
[Link] the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
authority or his agents, or he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before
the court prior to the presentation of evidence
8. That the offended party is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some
physical defects which restrict his means of action, defense or communication with his
fellow being
9. such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-power of the
offender without however depriving him of consciousness of his act
10. other circumstances of similar nature
The offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.
The accused confined himself to giving a single blow with a bolo on the right arm
of the victim and did not repeat the blow. The death of the victim was due to the
neglect and the lack of medical treatment, his death having resulted from
hemorrhage which those who attended to him did not know how to stop or control
in time.
Pasion or obfuscation
there is pasion or obfuscation when the crime was committed due to an
uncontrollable burst of passion or emotion provoked by prior unjust or improper
acts.
CASE:
The act of the victim (Mr. A) in creating trouble during the wake of the father of
the accused (Mr. B) scandalizes the mourners and offends the sensibilities of the
grieving family, thereby, accused stab the victim (Mr. A) and died and therefore,
the accused guilt is mitigated by pasion or obfuscation (People vs. Samonte, 64
SCRA 319
Is jealousy an example of pasion or obfuscation?
The case of US vs HICKS 14, Phil 217
For about 5 years, the accused and the deceased (Victim) lived illicitly in a manner as
a husband and wife. Afterwards, the deceased (Victim)from the accused without any
reason and lived with another man. The accused was enraged(anger) by such conduct
and killed the deceased.
In order that jealousy be mitigated by pasion or obfuscation, the relationship must be
legitimate.
Voluntary surrender and confession of guilt
1. that the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority
2. surrender must be free and voluntary
The surrender must be spontaneous in such a manner that it shows the interest of
the accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, either because he
acknowledged his guilt.
Thus, the accused after hacking with bolo into the victim’s chest, ran toward the
municipal building. Upon seeing a patrolman, he immediately threw away his
bolo, raised his two hands offered no resistance and said to the patrolman “here is
my bolo, I stabbed the victim”. There was intent or desire to surrender voluntarily
to the authorities. People vs. Tenorio, 4 SCRA 700
CASE:
The Accused surrendered only after the warrant of arrest was served upon him.
When to surrender after the crime was committed? 5 days after the commission of
the crime and 2 days after the issuance of the warrant of arrest. People vs. Yecla
68 phil 740
PLEA of GUILT
1. The offender spontaneously confessed his guilt
2. That the confession of guilt was made in an open court
3. That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence.
That the offender is DEAF and DUMB, BLIND or otherwise suffering from some
PHYSICAL DEFECT which thus restricts his means of action.
Thus, when the accused is a PWD but educated and well mannered, will he be
mitigated? The RPC does not distinguish between educated and uneducated
PWD’s. the RPC considers them as being on equal footing.
AGGRAVATES CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Basis
They
are based on 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
commission (3) the means and ways employed (4) the
time or (5) the personal circumstances of the offender,
or of the offended party
FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Generic – Those that can generally apply to all
crimes
Example – Dwelling, Nighttime, or Recidivism
In Art. 14 the circumstances in paragraphs Nos.
1, 2, 3(dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 18, 19 and 20
except “by means of motor vehicles, “are
generic aggravating circumstances.
FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
2. Specific – Those that apply only to particular crimes.
Example – Ignominy in crimes against Chastity or
cruelty and treachery in crimes against persons.
In Art. 14, the circumstances in paragraphs Nos. 3
(except dwelling) 15, 16, 17, and 21 are specific
aggravating circumstances
FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
3. Qualifying – Those that change the nature of the crime
Example – Alevosia (treachery) or evident premeditation
qualifies the killing of a person to murder.
Art. 248 enumerates the qualifying aggravating
circumstances which qualify the killing of person to
murder.
FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
4. Inherent – Those that must of necessity
accompany the commission of the crime (Art.62,
par. 2)
Example - Evident premeditation is inherent in
robbery, theft, estafa, adultery, and
concubinage.
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Art. 14 Aggravating circumstances - the following are aggravating
circumstances:
1) That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position
2) That crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the public
authorities
3) That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect
due the offended party in account of his rank, age or sex or that it be
committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not
given provocation.
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
4) That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness
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
6) That the crime be committed in the nighttime or in an uninhabited place, or by
a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the
offense Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together
in the commission of the offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a
band
7) That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic, or other calamity or misfortune
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
8) That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or
person who insure or afford impunity
9) That the accused is a recidivist A recidivist is one who, at the
time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted
by final judgement of another crime embraced in the same title if
this code
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
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
11) That the crime be committed in consideration of a price,
reward or promise
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 involving great waste and ruin
13) That the act be committed with evident premeditation
14) That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
15) That advantage be taken of superior strength or means be
employed to weaken the defense
16) That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia) There is
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
17) That means be employed or circumstances brought about which
add ignominy to the natural effect of the act
CHAPTER FOUR
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY
18) That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry There is an
unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the
purpose
19) That as a means to the commission of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door
or window be broken
20) That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen
years of age, or by means of motor vehicle, airships, or other similar
means
21) That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission *
ADVANTAGE OF PUBLIC POSITION
Is present when the accused used their authority as member of PNP in the course of
investigation and shot the accused and died.
INSULT TO PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
If Mr. A killed Mr. B in the presence of the town Mayor is aagravating circumstance.
DISREGARD OF RANK, AGE, SEX OR DWELLING OF OFFENDED PARTY
Rank- refers to a high social position or standing or designation or title of distinction conferred upon an
officer. EG. Pres, VP, Judge, Members of the AFP, etc.
AGE:
Killing of a JUDGE because he was strict or by reason of resentment which the accused was mad on
the decision of the JUDGE who was not favorable to them. (People vs. Valeriano 90 phil 34)
SEX:
This refers to the female sex not a male sex.
When a person compels a woman to go to his house against her will, the crime of coercion with the
aggravating circumstance of disrespect to sex is committed.
Direct Assault upon the Lady Teacher is Aggravating Circumstance People vs Quevengco, 2 Phil 412
DWELLING OF OFFENDED PARTY
The victim was raped in the boarding house where she was a bed spacer. Her
room was constituted a dwelling place. People vs. Daniel 86 SCRA 511
The victim, while sleeping as a guest in a Hotel were shot to death by Mr. X. This
is considered Dwelling place in the case of People vs. Basa, 83 phil 622
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE AND OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
Abuse of confidence exists only when the offended party has TRUSTED the
OFFENDER who later abuses such trust by committing the crime.
EG. A jealous lover, who had already determined to kill his sweetheart, invited her
to a ride in the city. While they are in the car, the jealous lover stabbed her. People
vs. Marasigan 70 Phil 583