Criminal Law 1 Reviewer
Headers
Definitions and Terms
Laws
Cases
PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW (RPC-BOOK 1)
DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL LAW
A branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment.
THEORIES OF CRIMINAL LAW
Classical Theory
There is a crime because of free will (choice)
The basis of criminal liability is the human free will and the purpose of its penalty is retribution.
Man is essentially a moral creature with an absolute free will to choose between good and evil, thereby placing more stress on the effect or result of the felonious act than upon the criminal himself.
Positivist Theory
There’s a crime because of environmental factors (e.g. extreme poverty). Hence, they deserve rehabilitation
Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon which constrains him to do wrong, in spite of or contrary to his volition.
The crime is essentially a social and natural phenomenon; cannot be treated by laws and imposition of punishment; but rather through a personal and individual investigation conducted by a body of psychiatrists and social scientists.
Mixed Theory
Mixed of classical and positivist
ex. Heinous crimes - classical
Economic crimes - positivist
Utilitarian Theory
Greatest good for the greatest number of people.
SOURCES OF PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW
RPC (Act No. 3815)
Special Penal Laws
Presidential Decrees
Ordinances
Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine legis (There is no crime when there is no law punishing it.
Common law crime- acts of omissions that are punishable even if there is now law punishing it.
D. DIVISIONS OF THE RPC
Book 1
Book 2
Prelim Title + Titles 1-5
Titles 1-14
15 Chapters
46 Chapters
8 Sections
15 Sections
1- 113 Articles
114-367 Articles
E. POWER TO DEFINE AND PUNISH CRIMES
Maintenance of Public Order
Section 5, Article II, 1987 Constitution. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.
Legislative Power
Section 1, Article VI, 1987 Constitution. Section 1. The legislative power shall be vested in the Congress of the Philippines which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives, except to the extent reserved to the people by the provision on initiative and referendum.
U.S v. Pablo, 35 Phil 94 (1916)
Facts: Pablo testified under oath that he and Tomas De Leon arrived at the said place, only saw Francisco Dato and not Malicsi and Rodrigo. But turns out he was bribed to lie on the stand.
He was charged of perjury. However, according to Act No. 1697 relating to perjury and repealing clause of Administrative Code does not say under what other penal law in force the crime of false testimony shall be punished at least if not that of perjury.
Issue: Whether or not the respondent is guilty of the crime of perjury or of false testimony under the provisions contained in Art. 318 to 324 of the Revised Penal Code when the same has been deemed repealed by Act No. 1697 of the Administrative Code.
Ruling: Yes. The Articles 318 to 324 of the Penal Code provide for punishment for false testimony and were not expressly repealed by the said Act. No. 1697. Hence, Article 318 to 324 of the Penal Code are deemed to be in force and are properly applicable to crimes of false testimony.
People v. Santiago, 43 Phil 120 (1922)
Facts: The trial court erred in not taking judicial notice of the fact that the appellant was being prosecuted in conformity with Act No. 2886 of the Philippine Legislature and that the Act is unconstitutional and gave no jurisdiction in this case.
Issue: Whether or not Act No. 2886, under which the complaint in the present case was filed, is valid and constitutional as the Philippine Legislature amended General Orders No. 58 with it considering that its provisions have the character of constitutional law.
Ruling: Yes. Act No. 2886, do not partake of the same character as the provisions of a constitutionThese amendments repeatedly made by the Philippine Commission as well as by our present Legislature are perfectly within the scope of the powers of the said legislative bodies as the successors of the Military Government that promulgated General Orders No. 58.
F. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON AUTHORITY TO ENACT PENAL LAWS
Due Process and Equal Protection Section 1, Article III. 1987 Constitution
Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.
Freedom of Expression Section 4, Article III, 1987 Constitution
Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.
Freedom of Religion Section 5, Article III, 1987 Constitution
Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religious test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.
Criminal Due Process Section 14, Article III, 1987 Constitution
Section 14. (1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law.
(2) In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of evidence in his behalf. However, after arraignment, trial may proceed notwithstanding the absence of the accused: Provided, that he has been duly notified and his failure to appear is unjustifiable.
No Excessive fines nor cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment Section 19, Article III, 1987 Constitution
Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
(2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.
Bill of Attainder Section 22, Article III, 1987 Constitution
No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
People v. Ferrer et al.
Facts: On March 5, 1970 a criminal complaint for violation of section 4 of the Anti-Subversion Act was filed against the respondent Feliciano Co in the Court of First Instance of Tarlac. Co moved to quash on the ground that the Anti-Subversion Act is a bill of attainder.
Issue: Whether or not Section 4 of the Anti-Subversion Act is a bill of attainder.
Ruling: No. Their guilt still has to be judicially established. The Government has yet to prove at the trial that the accused joined the Party knowingly, willfully and by overt acts, and that they joined the Party, knowing its subversive character and with specific intent to further its basic objective.
Ex Post Facto Law Section 22, Article III, 1987 Constitution
No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
People v. Villaraza, 81 SCRA 95 (1978)
Facts: Accused was charged with estafa for having issued on October 16, 1974 two bouncing checks for the total sum of P4, 966. 63.
Respondent judge argues that the case falls within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance because estafa committed by the accused is punishable by prision mayor medium under Presidential Decree No. 818 which took effect on October 22, 1975 and which amended article 315 of the Revised Penal Code
Issues: Presidential Decree No. 818 which took effect on October 22, 1975 and which amended article 315 of the Revised Penal Code.
Ruling: The penalty of prision mayor medium, or eight years and one day to ten years, imposed by Presidential Decree No. 818, applies only to swindling by means of issuing bouncing checks which was committed on or after October 22, 1975.
G. General Principles
Mala In Se
Mala in se (“evil in itself”) – A crime or an act that is inherently immoral, such as murder, arson or rape. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Ed.]
There must be the occurrence of actus reus and mens rea.
Acharon v. People, G.R. No. 224946, November 9, 2021
Issues: Whether the CA erred in finding Christian guilty of causing psychological or emotional anguish when he allegedly failed to: (1) financially support AAA; and (2) keep the communication lines open with the latter.
Ruling: The Court grants the appeal. Christian is, as he should be, acquitted of the charge.
Mere failure or an inability to provide financial support is not punishable by R.A. 9262. There needs to be the DENIAL of financial support for it to be punishable.
Mens Rea and Actus Rea
Mens rea refers to the accused’s guilty state of mind or criminal intent accompanying the actus reus.
is a Latin phrase for “guilty mind” basically, the state of mind. In a case, the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the mental element or “guilty mind” while committing a crime to secure a conviction. This is according to the Black’s Law Dictionary. Let’s take an example of theft, the mens rea for this crime is the intention to deprive the rightful owner of the property. If someone was involved in an act but without the intention to commit a crime, they may not be convicted for the said crime.
Actus reus external or overt acts or omissions included in a crime’s definition.
is a Latin phrase for “guilty act”. Actus reus is the wrongful deed that comprises the physical components of a crime that must be coupled with mens rea for one to be held criminally liable. The “guilty act” in theft is the actual taking of or unlawful control over property without the owner’s consent.
Mala Prohibita
Mala prohibita (“prohibited evil”) – An act that is a crime merely because it is prohibited by statute, although the act itself is not necessarily immoral. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Ed.]
Lim v. People, 340 SCRA 497 (2000)
Facts: Lim was charged with BP Blg. 22
Issue: Whether B.P. No. 22 has been violated by Rosa Lim (also known as bouncing checks law)
Ruling: Yes. Unlike in estafa, 25 under B. P. No. 22, one need not prove that the check was issued in payment of an obligation, or that there was damage. The damage done is to the banking system.
This case is a perfect example of an act mala prohibita. Petitioner issued two checks. They were dishonored upon presentment for payment due to the fact that the account was closed. Petitioner failed to rebut the presumption that she knew her funds were insufficient at the time of issue of the checks. And she failed to pay the amount of the checks or make arrangements for its payment within five (5) banking days from receipt of notice of dishonor. B.P. No. 22 was clearly violated.
Difference between Mala In Se and Mala Prohibita
Violations of the Revised Penal Code are referred to as malum in se, which literally means, that the act is inherently evil or bad or per se wrongful. On the other hand, violations of Special Laws are ‘generally’ referred to as malum prohibitum.
A common misconception is that all mala in se crimes are found in the Revised Penal Code (RPC), while all mala prohibita crimes are provided by special penal laws. In reality, however, there may be mala in se crimes under special laws, such as plunder under R.A. No. 7080, as amended. Similarly, there may be mala prohibita crimes defined in the RPC, such as technical malversation.
Example:
Republic Act No. 7080 defines the crime of plunder as the accumulation of iII gotten wealth through a combination or series of overt criminal acts in the aggregate
amount of 1'50,000,000.00 by a public official. The theft of such an amount from the
nation is unforgivably criminal, and no person who is capable of such an act has a place
in public office.
Article 219, RPC Illegal Use of Public Fund (Technical Malversation) persons conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium period and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos. It’s technical malversation if it’s for the public BUT for another purpose. It is malversation if it’s for private use.
Mala in Se
Mala prohibita
Evil in nature (ex. murder)
Evil because there’s a law prohibiting it. (ex. Illegal possession of firearms)
Good faith is a defense
Good faith is not a defense
Modifying circumstances are applicable
Modifying circumstances are not applicable
H. INTERPRETATION OF PENAL LAWS
Doctrine of Pro Reo
Construed or applied and the law admits of two interpretations - one lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, that interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the offender will be adopted.
Basis: The fundamental rule that all doubts shall be construed in favor of the accused and presumption of innocence of the accused.
Art. III, Sec. 14(2), 1987 Const. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved.
Note: This is peculiar only to criminal law.
Bongalon v. People, 694 SCRA 12 (2013)
Issues: Whether petitioner violated Section 3 (b) of Republic Act No. 7610
Ruling: No. Not every instance of the laying of hands on a child constitutes the crime of child abuse under Section 10 (a) of Republic Act No. 7610.1 Only when the laying of hands is shown beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the accused to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being should it be punished as child abuse. Otherwise, it is punished under the Revised Penal Code.
The records did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that his laying of hands on Jayson had been intended to debase the "intrinsic worth and dignity" of Jayson as a human being, or that he had thereby intended to humiliate or embarrass Jayson. The records showed the laying of hands on Jayson to have been done at the spur of the moment and in anger, indicative of his being then overwhelmed by his fatherly concern for the personal safety of his own minor daughters who had just suffered harm at the hands of Jayson and Roldan. With the loss of his self-control, he lacked that specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being that was so essential in the crime of child abuse.
Not all acts of hitting a child is child abuse.
People v. Gonzales, 361 SCRA 350 (2001)
Facts:
Romeo Gonzales guilty for Violation of Sections 8 and 4, Art. II., RA 6425 and imposes a penalty of imprisonment of 6 years and 1 day and a fine of P6,000 (straight penalty) for Criminal Case No. 91-180 life imprisonment and a fine of P20,000 for Criminal Case No. 91-181.
Gonzales appealed.
Issue: Whether the Indeterminate Sentence Law should apply to Crim. Case No. 91-180
Ruling: Yes. Applying the pro reo doctrine in criminal law, we hold that the penalty prescribed in R. A. No. 6425, Section 8 while not using the nomenclature of the penalties under the Revised Penal Code is actually prision mayor. Consequently, it is the first part of Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, which shall apply in imposing the indeterminate sentence.
Rule of Lenity
When in doubt, rule for the accused. Doubt must be in favor of the accused and not against him.
Dubio pro reo principle is the rule of lenity.
Go v. Dimagiba, 460 SCRA 451 (2005)
Facts: Dimagiba was subsequently prosecuted for 13 counts of violation of BP 22. After a joint trial, the MTCC (Branch 4) rendered a Decision on July 16, 1999, convicting the accused in the 13 cases.
The respondent found the guilty beyond reasonable doubt
Issues:
Whether the Petition for habeas corpus was validly granted
Whether the SC-AC No. 12-2000 deleted the imposition of the penalty of imprisonment
Whether the preferential imposition of a fine in lieu of imprisonment as allegedly enunciated in SA-AC No. 12-2000 shall be applied in the case at bar as the respondent is not a “first-time offender”.
Ruling:
No. His Petition for a writ of habeas corpus was clearly an attempt to reopen a case that had already become final and executory.
No. SC-AC No. 12-2000 did not delete the alternative penalty of imprisonment. The competence to amend the law belongs to the legislature, not to this Court.
No. Being not a first-time offender is not a sole factor in determining whether he deserves the preferred penalty of fine alone. It is in the trial court’s discretion to impose any penalty within the confines of the law.
People v. Sultan, 331 SCRA 216 (2000)
Facts: The accused raped the victim several times on the same day
Issue: Whether the additional rape/s by the accused-appellant can be considered as an aggravating circumstance
Ruling: No. The Court realized that there was no law providing for the additional rape/s or homicide/s for that matter to be considered as aggravating circumstance. Consequently, unless and until a law is passed providing that the additional rape/s or homicide/s may be considered aggravating, the Court must construe the penal law in favor of the offender as no person may be brought within its terms if he is not clearly made so by the statute.
RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF PENAL LAWS
Laws shall have no retroactive effect unless the contrary is provided. Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so far as they favor the person guilty of a felony or misdemeanor.
Hernan v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 217874, Dec. 5, 2017)
Facts: Accused was charged and convicted with malversation of public funds.
RA No. 10951 has been enacted lowering the penalty of the crime of the accused.
Issue: Whether or not the case can be reopened
Ruling: Yes. The Court finds that it is still necessary to reopen the instant case, but in order to modify the penalty imposed by said court.
But, in application of the Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10951 which accordingly reduced the penalty applicable to the crime charged as an exceptional circumstance. Because of this, not only must the petitioner's sentence be modified respecting the settled rule on the retroactive effectivity of laws, the sentencing being favorable to the accused, she may even apply for probation, as long as she does not possess any ground for disqualification.
II. CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIMINAL LAW
GENERALITY
Art. 14, NCC
Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.
R.A. 75 (Law on preferential application)
AN ACT TO PENALIZE ACTS WHICH WOULD IMPAIR THE PROPER OBSERVANCE BY THE REPUBLIC AND INHABITANTS OF THE PHILIPPINES OF THE IMMUNITIES, RIGHT, AND PRIVILEGES OF DULY ACCREDITED FOREIGN DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR AGENTS IN THE PHILIPPINES.
US v SWEET, 1 PHIL. 18
FACTS: Philip K. Sweet, abused a prisoner. He claims that he was “acting in the line of duty” and that the acts alleged to constitute the offense are orders of his military superiors, but no evidence supports his claim.
ISSUE: Whether the alleged offense committed by an employee of the United States military authorities deprive the Court of First Instance of jurisdiction
RULING: Yes. The court has jurisdiction to try offenders charged with violation of the Penal Code within their territorial limits, regardless of the military character of the accused. The fact that the acts charged in the complaint would be punishable as an offense under the Spanish military legislation does not render them any less an offense under the article of the Penal Code punishable under civil courts.
Except: For cases that are service-connected in which case it shall be tried by court-martial.
TERRITORIALITY
Art. 1, 1987 Constitution
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
Art. 2, RPC
Article 2. 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
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;
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
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.
Extra-territorial application of RA 11479 (Sec. 49)
Vessels
Just as our merchant ship is an extension of our territory, foreign merchant ship is considered an extension of the territory of the country to which it belongs. For this reason, an offense committed on the high seas on board a foreign merchant vessel is not triable by our courts.
There are two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes committed aboard merchant vessels while in the territorial waters of another country.
French Rule. — Such crimes are not triable in the courts of that country, unless their commission affects the peace and security of the territory or the safety of the state is endangered.
English Rule. — Such crimes are triable in that country, unless they merely affect things within the vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof.
In this country, we observe the English Rule.
Crimes not involving a breach of public order committed on board a foreign merchant vessel in transit not triable by our courts.
Mere possession of opium aboard a foreign merchant vessel in transit is not triable in Philippine court.
Landing or using opium is an open violation of the laws of the PH.
The person in possession of opium on board that vessel is liable.
Merchant ships are subjected to territorial laws but NOT warships like United States Army transport.
Reagan v. Commissioner
Facts: William C. Reagan imported and sold his car here in ph in the clark air base and was taxed for it. He contends that he should not be taxed because the clark air base is not within the ph territory
Issue: WON the Clark Field Air Base is a foreign property therefore excluded from the power of Philippine taxation.
Ruling:No. The consent was given purely as a matter of comity, courtesy, or expediency over the bases as part of the Philippine territory or divested itself completely of jurisdiction over offenses committed therein. This provision is not and can not on principle or authority be construed as a limitation upon the rights of the Philippine Government.
They retain their status as native soil. They are still subject to its authority. Its jurisdiction may be diminished, but it does not disappear. They are not and cannot be foreign territory.
AAA vs BBB
FACTS: A and B were married but B had an affair in Singapore.
ISSUE: Whether or not a complaint for psychological abuse under R.A. No. 9262 may be filed within the Philippines if the illicit relationship is conducted abroad.
RULING: YES. In Section 7 of R.A. No. 9262, venue undoubtedly pertains to jurisdiction. As correctly pointed out by AAA, Section 7 provides that the case may be filed where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the option of the complainant. While the psychological violence as the means employed by the perpetrator is certainly an indispensable element of the offense, equally essential also is the element of mental or emotional anguish which is personal to the complainant.What may be gleaned from Section 7 of R.A. No. 9262 is that the law contemplates that acts of violence against women and their children may manifest as transitory or continuing crimes.
PROSPECTIVITY
Art. 4, NCC
Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is provided.
Art. 21 and 22 RPC
Article 21. Penalties that may be imposed. - No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
Article 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. - Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same.
Effect of repeal on penal law
People v Tamayo
Facts: Appellant was convicted. While this appeal was pending, the municipal council repealed section 2 in question, which repeal was duly approved by the provincial board, and the act complained of, instead of being a violation of the municipal ordinances, is now legal in that municipality.
Issue: Is Crisanto Tamayo still in violation of section 2, municipal ordinance No. 5, series of 1932 when it has been repealed by the municipality?
Ruling: No, the supreme court held that the legislative intent as shown by the action of the municipal council is that such conduct, formerly denounced, is no longer deemed criminal, and it would be illogical for the court to attempt to sentence appellant for an offense that no longer exists.
People v. Almuete
FACTS: Almuete and three others were charged with a violation of section 39 of the Agricultural Tenancy Law punishing unlawful reaping or threshing a portion of the crop at any previous to date set for its threshing.
ISSUE: Whether the tenant's act of pre- reaping and pre-threshing without notice to the landlord is punishable pursuant to Sec. 39 of the Agricultural Tenancy Law.
RULING: No. Since there is no more a rice share tenancy system, there is no longer a need to punish violations in relation to it.
Class notes:
Generality (WHO? PERSONS)
GR: Criminal law is binding on all persons who reside (permanent) or sojourn (ex. tourist) in the Philippine territory.
EXCP: Criminal law is not applicable
EXCEPTIONS OF GENERALITY
Treaty Stipulation
Treaty is a written agreement between countries
E.g. PHL-US Military base treaty
Those individuals, US soldiers, who commit crime in the PHL in relation to their official functions are not covered by PHL criminal law.
Stipulations are the provisions/contents
Laws of Preferential Application
AKA special treatment to certain individuals in case they violate law, they will not be held liable.
(e.g. Muslim Personal Law - bigamy is not applicable under RA 75; domestic servants of political/diplomatic covered by PHL CL.)
Principles of Public International Law
Are political/diplomatic representatives of foreign nation (they are all diplomats, they just have different ranks)
Sovereign/ Head of State
E.g. President of foreign nation
Putin raped 10 Filipino women - we can’t apply the law WON he was acting in line of his duties
Ambassador
e.g. even without the exercise of their functions, PH law will not be applied
An ambassador of US went to a bar and raped a woman, he can’t be held liable.
Ministers Plenipotentiary
Ministers Resident
Charges d’affaires
e.g. officer in charge with business
Consuls
In relation to his/her official functions. (But if it’s not related then we CAN apply CL)
Territoriality (WHERE? PLACES)
GR: Criminal law is applicable to crimes committed within PHL territory; crime outside PHL is not applicable.
EXCP: even if the crime is committed outside the PHL, out CL is still applicable
ship/airship (PHL registered in international waters)
Counterfeiting PHL money
Introduction of counterfeited money in PHL
Public officers in relation to their official functions.
National security (e.g. treason)
VESSELS
General rule
Government vessel/warship - country of origin sa kanila ang jurisdiction (ex. Coast guard)
Commercial/merchant vessels - for business/profit (ex. ferry)
PHL registered + PHL waters — PHL has jurisdiction
PHL registered + International waters — PHL has jurisdiction
PHL registered + another country’s waters — it depends whether that country follows French/English Rule
Foreign registered + PHL waters — PHL has jurisdiction
Foreign registered + International waters — PHL has NO jurisdiction
Foreign registered + another country’s water —WON the country followers French/English rule
FRENCH RULE
ENGLISH RULE
Flag state rule
Coastal state rule
GR: flag country; country of registry
GR: the host country will have jurisdiction
EXCP: host country (where country the vessel is located)
if the crime affects the peace and order of host country
EXCP: flag country
If the crime merely involves an internal management of the vessel ex. minor crimes
PROSPECTIVITY (WHEN? TIME)
GR: Criminal law have NO retroactive (backwards) effect; Criminal law have prospective (forward) effect
Latin maxim: Lex prospicit, non respecit — The law looks forward and not backwards
EXCP: CL have retroactive effect
Favorable to the accused + not a habitual delinquent
Expressly declared by law (e.g. RA 10951)
Decriminalization - the act is no longer a crime (e.g. vagrancy – RA 10158 [decriminalizing vagrancy])
3 characteristics of a habitual delinquent:
Period: 10 years within the period
3 times or more of any of the crime
Falsification
Robbery
Estafa
Theft
Serious physical injuries
Less serious physical injuries
III. FELONIES
Class notes
Intentional Felonies (IF)
Culpable Felonies (CF)
Elements of IF:
Elements of CF:
Intelligence - the ability to understand the consequences of your actions
1. Intelligence
Freedom - the act is voluntary
2. Freedom
Intent
General Intent - intent to do harm/evil
Specific Intent - depends upon the crime (e.g. intent to kill)
3. Negligence or; - lack of foresight
Imprudence - lack of skill
Criminal Liabilities and Felonies
Definition
Felonies - Acts and omissions punishable by law.
The elements of felonies in general are:
1. That there must be an act or omission.
2. That the act or omission must be punishable by the Revised Penal Code.
3. That the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa.
Criminal Liability shall be incurred: (Art. 4)
By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.
By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
Intentional Felonies v. Culpable Felonies
In intentional felonies, the act or omission of the offender is malicious. In the language of Art. 3, the act is performed with deliberate intent (with malice). In culpable felonies, the act or omission of the offender is not malicious. The injury caused by the offender to another person is "unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act performed without malice."
Classification of Felonies (Art. 9, RPC)
Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Article 25 of this code. e.g. Article 248 Murder
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with the above-mentioned articles.
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding forty thousand pesos or both is provided.
Classification of Felonies according to their gravity:
Capital punishment = death penalty
“Or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive” — any is used in the phrase , when the penalty prescribed for the offense is composed of two or more distinct penalties, the higher or the highest of the penalties must be an afflictive penalty.
When the penalty prescribed for the offense is composed of two or more distinct penalties, the higher or highest of the penalties must be a correctional penalty.
The penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P40,000 or both is provided.
Art. 9 in relation to Art. 25, RPC
Scale of penalty (Article 25)
Capital Punishment
Death Penalty
Afflictive penalties (for Grave Felonies)
Reclusion perpetua
Reclusion temporal
Prision mayor
Correctional penalties (for Less Grave Felonies)
Prision correctional
Arresto mayor
Suspension
Destierro
Light penalties (for Light Felonies)
Arresto menor
Elements of Criminal Liability
1. Actus Reus (guilty act)
2. Mens Rea (guilty mind)
Dolo (Deliberate Intent)
Requisites for Dolo:
Freedom
Intelligence
Intent
People v. Oanis, 74 Phil. 257
Facts: Oanis contends that he was acting in the fulfillment of his duty when he shot the sleeping man he was facing behind him.
Issue: Whether the appellants are guilty of murder
Ruling: Yes. The person in the room being then asleep, appellants had ample time and opportunity to ascertain his identity without hazard to themselves. Though an officer in making a lawful arrest is justified in using such force as is reasonably necessary to secure and detain the offender, overcome his resistance, prevent his escape, recapture him if he escapes, and protect himself from bodily harm (People vs. Delima, 46 Phil, 738), yet he is never justified in using unnecessary force or in treating him with wanton violence, or in resorting to dangerous means when the arrest could be effected otherwise (6 C.J.S., par. 13, p. 612). The doctrine is restated in the new Rules of Court thus: "No unnecessary or unreasonable force shall be used in making an arrest, and the person arrested shall not be subject to any greater restraint than is necessary for his detention."
And, as once held by this Court, a deliberate intent to do an unlawful act is essentially inconsistent with the idea of reckless imprudence, and where such unlawful act is wilfully done, a mistake in the identity of the intended victim cannot be considered as reckless imprudence to support a plea of mitigated liability.
In error in personae or mistake in the identity of the victim, the principle of mistake of fact does not apply.
General and Specific Intent
The third element of voluntariness is general intent. In some particular felonies, proof of particular specific intent is required.
EG:
**In frustrated or attempted homicide – intent to kill is essential.
**In theft – intent to gain is required.
**In forcible abduction – the specific intent of lewd designs must be proved.
Crimes with general intent involve knowingly committing a criminal act. Specific intent crimes involve knowingly committing the criminal act as well as an intent to cause a particular result by committing the act.
Mistake of Fact
Mistake of fact is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another. He is not, however, criminally liable, because he did not act with criminal intent. An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption of criminal intent which arises upon the commission of a felonious act.
Requisites of mistake of fact as defense:
That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be
The intention of the accused in doing the act is lawful
The mistake should be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.
US v. Ah Chong; 15 Phil 488
FACTS: Ah Chong killed the victim because he thought he was a thief.
ISSUE: Whether or not the defendant can be held criminally responsible who, by reason of a mistake as to the facts
RULING: Yes. The decision of the lower court was reversed. Ah Chong was acquitted. The case was a “mistake of fact” resulting to self-defense justified under Article 11(1) of the Revised Penal Code where there is:
“Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea” – The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal.
Mala prohibita (exception to the requirement of mens rea)
Are violations of mere rules of convenience designed to secure a more orderly regulation of the affairs of society.
Intent v. Motive
Motive is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite result. Intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such a result. Motivation is not an essential element of crime.
When is motive relevant?
When there's doubt with the identity of the accused
When there is two antagonistic theories or versions of killing
When there are no eye witnesses and suspicion fall upon a number of persons
When evidence is mere circumstantial.
Culpa (Constructive Intent)
Negligence (Lack of Foresight)
Deficiency of perception
If a person fails to pay proper attention and to use due diligence in foreseeing the injury or damage impending to be caused, there is negligence.
Imprudence (Lack of Skill)
Deficiency of action
If a person fails to take necessary precaution to avoid injury to person or damage to property, there is imprudence
Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro, GR No. 172716, Nov. 17, 2010
Facts: Ivler was charged for physical injuries, damage of property and for homicide on different information both because of reckless imprudence
Issue: Whether further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 82366 are prohibited by the petitioner's constitutional right protected by the Double Jeopardy Clause.
Ruling: Yes. The Constitution protected the petitioner from prosecutions of jeopardy of second punishment for the same offense bars further proceedings in Criminal Case No. 82366. As the act was singular, whether the injurious result affects one or several people, the offense (criminal negligence) remains unitary and cannot be divided into separate crimes and prosecutions.
Transferred Intent Doctrine (Par. 1, Art. 4, RPC)
Article 4. Criminal Liability shall be incurred:
By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.Committing is different from performing. It should be done with malice. If there is no malice it would be criminal negligence.
By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. (Impossible Crime)
Requisites Par. 1, Art. 4:
That an intentional felony has been committed ; and
That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the felony committed by the offender.
El que de la causa del mal causado
He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused.
One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or intenses or not.
Not applicable for: snatching a property of another to satisfy your curiosity.
Necessary force to retain what belongs to him.
Proximate Cause like domino effect
Is that cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occured.
There must be a cause and effect relationship with no intervening cause.
Pre-existing conditions such as: are not intervening causes
Pathological condition of the victim (las condiciones patologica del ledionado)
Predisposition of the offended party (la constitucion fisica del herido)
Concomitant or concurrent conditions, such as the negligence or fault of the doctors (la falta de medicos para sister al herido)
It is not the proximate cause when:
There is an active force that intervene between the felony committed and the resulting injury, and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused; or
The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim.
It is the natural consequence of physical injuries when:
The victim at the time was in normal health
Death is expected from the physical injuries
Death ensued within a reasonable time
People v. Villacorta, GR No. 186412, September
Facts: The proximate cause of Cruz’s death is the tetanus infection, and not the stab wound.
Issue: Whether or not the stab wound caused by Villacorta was the proximate cause of Cruz’s death
Ruling: No. The stab wound was not the proximate cause for Cruz’s death but merely a remote cause.
The incubation period of tetanus, i.e., the time between injury and the appearance of unmistakable symptoms, ranges from 2 to 56 days. However, over 80 percent of patients become symptomatic within 14 days.
Aberratio Ictus
There is a mistake in the blow.
A intended to hit B but A accidentally hit C. A is still liable.
People v. Guillen, GR No. L-1477, January 18, 1950
Facts: Accused threw a grenade at the stage and was kicked off the stage, causing injuries to people and killing a person.
Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of murder and mutiple frustrated murder
Ruling: Yes. In throwing a hand grenade at the President with the intention of killing him, the appellant acted with malice. He is therefore liable for all the consequences of his wrongful act; for in accordance with article 4 of the Revised Penal Code. And, as held by this Court, a deliberate intent to do an unlawful act is essentially inconsistent with the idea of reckless imprudence.
Error in Personae
There is a mistake in the identity of the victim.
A intended to hit B, but because of the dark, accidentally hits C. A is still liable.
Praeter Intentionem (Par. 3, Art. 13, RPC)
The injurious result is greater than that intended.
A hit B on the head that caused B to hit the pavement and he died. A is liable for B’s death.
Additional Notes:
Any person who creates in another’s mind an immediate sense of danger, which causes the latter to do something resulting in the latter’s injuries, is liable for the resulting injuries.
Example: A threatened B to give him his money. B, in panic, jumped on the building to escape and died. A is liable for B’s death.
Wrong done must be the direct, natural, and logical consequence of a felonious act.
Example/s: A threatened B to give him his money. B, in panic, jumped on the building to escape and died. A is liable for B’s death.
A removed the cover of his wound due to the injury caused by B that led to his death. B is still liable.
Blow was cause of death; accelerated death; proximate cause of death
Offended party refused surgery or injury was aggravated by infection.
If the injury has healed, the accused is not liable anymore. Unless it results in further injury where the former injury contributed to.
Impossible Crime (Par. 2, Art. 4, RPC)
By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means
Elements
(1) that the act performed would be an offense against persons or property;
(2) that the act was done with evil intent; and
(3) that its accomplishment was (a) inherently impossible (factual or legal impossible), or (b) the means employed was either inadequate or ineffectual.
(4) That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another provision of the RPC. Because it is the crime of last resort.
Penalty (Article 59)
The court shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos.
Intod v. CA, GR 103119, Oct. 21, 1992
FACTS: They intended to kill a person so they went to her house and fired at one bedroom. No one was in the bedroom; no one was killed.
ISSUE/S: The petitioner seeks from the Supreme Court to modify his judgment by holding him liable only for an impossible crime and not attempted murder citing Article 4 (2) of the Revised Penal Code.
RULING: Yes. The petition was granted thereby holding the petitioner guilty of an impossible crime as defined and penalized in Articles 4, paragraph 2, and 59 of the Revised Penal code. The Supreme Court sentenced him to suffer the penalty of 6 months arresto mayor, together with accessory penalties provided by the law, and to pay the costs.
CONCEPTS/DOCTRINES:
Legal impossibility occurs where the intended acts, even if completed, would not amount to a crime. Legal impossibility would apply to those circumstances where (1) the motive, desire and expectation is to perform an act in violation of the law; (2) there is intention to perform the physical act; (3) there is a performance of the intended physical act; and (4) the consequence resulting from the intended act does not amount to a crime.
Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos- the phrase "inherent impossibility" that is found in Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code makes no distinction between factual or physical impossibility and legal impossibility.
IV. STAGES OF EXECUTION
A. Consummated (Art. 6, RPC)
kapag nandon yung crime i-assume mo na na consummated
all of the elements of the felony are present
ex. A killed B
Homicide v Murder — Murder has a qualifying aggravating circumstances (Art. 248) like treachery. Homicide doesn't have a qualifying aggravating circumstances.
B. Frustrated (Art. 6, RPC)
Elements:
all acts of execution are present/performed
which would produce the felony
but do NOT produce it
because of a cause/s independent of the will of the perpetrator
A tried to kill B and it was fatal. B survived.
People v. Serrano, GR 175023, July 5, 2010
Facts: The victim boxed with a different group, he was left in the creek and his intestines were out and was sent to the hospital.
Issue: Whether the petitioner is guilty of attempted homicide
Ruling: Yes. The victim is guilty of attempted homicide on the grounds that the wounds attained by the victim were not fatal for it to be considered as frustrated homicide. CA ruled that the crime committed only reached the attempted stage as there was lack of evidence that the stab wound inflicted was fatal to cause the victim’s death. The CA observed that the attending physician did not testify in court and has also considered that the Medical Certificate and the Discharge Summary issued by the East Avenue Medical Center fell short of specifying the nature or gravity of the wound.
Colinares v. People, GR 182748, Dec. 13, 2011
Facts: Arnel sneaked behind Rufino and struck him using a stone about 15.5 inches in diameter in the head causing Rufino to fall unconscious. Jesus fled.
On the other hand, Ananias was walking home when he saw Rufino lying by the roadside. Dr. Albert Belleza testified that these injuries were serious and potentially fatal but Rufino chose to go home after initial treatment.
Issue: Whether Arnel is guilty of frustrated homicide
Ruling: No. There is a lack of medical evidence on record to support the prosecution’s claim that Rufino would have died without timely medical intervention. The wound of Rufino was not fatal for it to be regarded as frustrated homicide. Thus, the Court finds Arnel liable only for attempted homicide and entitled to the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.
Valenzuela v. People, GR 160188, June 21, 2007
Facts: Petitioner and Calderon were seen outside the Super Sale Club by a security guard named Lago. Lago saw the petitioner dragging a push cart with cases of Tide Ultramatic where he unloaded it into the taxi, when they were about to leave the premises, Lago stopped them and he asked for the receipt of the merchandise but to no avail. Both tried to escape by foot when Lago fired a warning shot to make the situation known to the other guards.
Issue: Whether the petitioner is guilty of consummated theft
Ruling: Yes. The theft committed cannot be considered as a frustrated felony. Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, if all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present then it is deemed as a consummated felony. In this case, the elements (1) taking of personal property, (2) the property belongs to another (3) the taking be done with intent to gain (4) taking be done without the consent of the owner (5) taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things are all present.
It cannot be deemed as frustrated theft because in those crimes, the moment you take the property of another, that’s already consummate theft. There is already the act of unlawful taking even if the stolen item is not yet disposed of by the accused.
U.S. v. Valdes, GR L-14128, December 10, 1918
Facts: at around 8 and 9 AM, while Mrs. Lewin was absent her house was seen to have smoke emitting from its lower floor by their neighbor Mrs. Auckback. As soon as she noticed it, Mrs. Lewin ordered her servant Paulino Banal to look for the source. He saw a piece of a jute sack and a rag, soaked in kerosene, were burning between a post of the house and a partition of the entresol. At that moment the defendant Severino Valdes was in the entresol, engaged in his work of cleaning while the other defendant was cleaning the horses.
Issue: Whether the accused has committed the crime of frustrated arson
Ruling: Yes. The fact of setting fire to a jute sack and a rag, soaked with kerosene oil and placed beside an upright of the house and a partition of the entresol of the building, thus endangering the burning of the latter, constitutes the crime of frustrated arson of an inhabited house, on an occasion when some of its inmates were inside of it. The crime is classified only as frustrated arson, because the defendant performed all the acts conceived to the burning of said house although independent to his will, it was not consumed.
Q: What if a part of the wall is burnt, is it still frustrated?
A: No. It is already a consummated arson.
C. Attempted Felony (Art. 6, RPC)
Elements:
Commences (sinimulan) the commission of a felony directly by overt acts — nagsimula na siyang mag-commit ng crime
NOT perform all acts of execution — pero hindi niya natapos
cause/accident — dahil sa accident
Other than (hindi dahil) his spontaneous desistance — hindi dahil siya ‘yung umatras
Additional elements:
there must be external acts and direct connection to the intended crime
Note: Kapag umatras ka, pwedeng hindi na siya attempted. Physical injuries na lang siya.
A —> B Sinubukang tagain ni A si B. Pero nakailag si B. Dumating ‘yung mga pulis. Umatras si A. A is liable for attempted murder.
1. People v. Campuhan, GR 129433, March 30, 2000
Facts: Campuhan kneeling before the victim, whose pajamas and panty were already removed, while his short pants were down to his knees. Campuhan tried to run but Corazon was able to ask for help and they detained the suspect for his offense at the back of their compound until their neighbors advised them to contact the barangay officials. Campuhan was apprehended. Physical examination of the victim yielded negative results. No evident sign of extra-genital physical injury was noted. Her hymen was intact and its orifice was only .5 cm in diameter.
The Trial court found him guilty of statutory rape and sentenced him to death
Issue: Whether Campuhan is guilty of consummated statutory rape
Ruling: No. Campuhan guilty of attempted rape not consummated rape. The prosecution failed to prove that Campuhan’s penis was able to penetrate the victim’s vagina however slight. Also, there were no external signs of physical injuries on the victim’s body to conclude that penetration had taken place.
The court was not persuaded that Corazon was in a position to fully see if Campuhan inserted his penis on Crysthel. Crysthel also testified that although she felt sad for what the accused had done, she said that the accused did not penetrate her vagina. Furthermore, the examination also proves that there is no sufficient evidence to prove that there is an insertion of penis on the victim.
Note: There is no such thing as frustrated rape or frustrated theft.
People v. Lizada, GR 143468-71, Jan. 24, 2003
Doctrine: The spontaneous desistance of a malefactor exempts him from criminal liability for the intended crime but it does not exempt him from the crime committed by him before his desistance.
FACTS: Eventually he entered her room wearing only short pants. She didn’t mind because she knew Rossel was around but the accused-appellant sat on her bed and placed himself on top of her. He touch her hands then her legs and breasts. She struggled to free herself. He removed her panty, touched her vagina, and inserted his finger before he proceeded to insert his penis in her vagina. HE ejaculated and she felt pain in her sex organ. Rossel passed by the room of Analia after drinking water from the refrigerator, and peeped through the door. He saw the accused-appellant on top of Analia. Accused-appellant saw Rossel and dismounted. Accused-appellant berated Rossel and ordered him to go to his room and sleep. Rossel did.
ISSUE: Whether Lizada is guilty of acts of lasciviousness only
RULING: NO. Accused-appellant is guilty of attempted rape and not of acts of lasciviousness.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. The essential elements of an attempted felony are as follows:
The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts;
He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony;
The offenders act be not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance;
The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause accident other than his spontaneous desistance.
People v. Lamahang (61 Phil 703)
FACTS: At early dawn on March 2, 1935, policeman Jose Tomambing, who was patrolling his beat on Delgado and C.R. Fuentes streets of the City of Iloilo, caughtthe accused in the act of making an opening with an iron bar on the wall of a store of cheap goods located on the last named street.
At that time the owner of the store, Tan Yu, was sleeping inside with another Chinaman.
The accusedhad only succeeded in breaking one board and in unfastening another from the wall, when the policeman showed up, who instantly arrested him and placed him under custody.
ISSUE: Whether the accused is guilty of attempted robbery
RULING: No. It must be shown that the offender clearly intended to take possession, for the purpose of gain, of some personal property belonging to another.Thus, in case of robbery, in order that the simple act of entering by means of force or violence another person's dwelling may be considered an attempt to commit this offense, it must be shown that the offender clearly intended to take possession, for the purpose of gain, of some personal property belonging to another. In the instant case, there is nothing in the record from which such purpose of the accused may reasonably be inferred.
D. Indeterminate Offense
It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain. Its nature in relation to its objective is ambiguous.
E. Lights Felonies, When Punishable (Art. 7 and Art. 9, Par. 3, RPC)
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P40,000. 00 or both, is provided.
GR: only punishable when consummated
EXCP: regardless of whether in attempted, frustrated, or attempted stage
crimes against persons
crimes against property
V. CONTINUING CRIMES
A. Continuing Crimes
“Continuing crime” is the term used in criminal procedure to denote that a certain crime may be prosecuted and tried not only before the court of the place where it was originally committed or began, but also before the court of the place where the crime was continued.
Hence, the term “continuing crime” is used in criminal procedure when any of the material ingredients of the crime was committed in different places.
Usually for theft or robbery cases
Larceny - theft
CONTINUING CRIME
Transitory crime
crime/any of its elements are committed in 2 or more cases
e.g. kidnapping - deprivation of liberty
e.g. felony of evasion of service of sentence
CONTINUED CRIME
delito continuado
elements:
plurality of acts there must be several acts
there is unity or same penal provision violated
there is unity or same criminal intent
B. Continued Crimes
A “continued crime” is one where the offender performs a series of acts violating one and the same penal provision committed at the same place and about the same time for the same criminal purpose,regardless of a series of acts done, it is regarded in law as one.
2. Single Larceny Doctrine
The taking of several things, whether belonging to the same or different owners, at the same time and place constitutes but one larceny.
People v. Tumlos, GR L-46428, April 13, 1939
Facts: In the present case, the information filed charges Tulmos with the theft of five cows belonging to Ambrosio, committed on the same date of the commission of the theft to the eight cows of Maximiano that he was charged with.
Issue: Whether convicting Tulmos to the present case would constitute autrefois convict or double jeopardy
Ruling: Yes. The theft of the thirteen cows committed by the defendant took place at the same time and in the same place; consequently, he performed but one act. As there is no division in the intent and criminal act, there is also no division in offense.
Santiago v. Garchitorena, GR 109266, Dec. 2, 1993 (EXCEPTION)
Facts: The prosecutor amended the information into 32 amendment information
Issue: Whether the 32 amendment information filed is a continued crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code
Ruling: Yes.The Supreme Court contends that there was only one crime that was committed in the petitioner's case, and hence, there should only be one information to be filed against her.
The strong probability even exists that the approval of the application or the legalization of the stay of the 32 aliens was done by a single stroke of the pen, as when the approval was embodied in the same document.
C. Continuing Crime v. Continued Crime
VI. COMPLEX CRIMES AND COMPOSITE CRIMES
A. Complex Crimes (ART 48, RPC) - penalty for the most serious crime in its MAX period
2 KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIME
Complex crime proper
one crime is a necessary means of committing another crime
e.g. estafa through falsification of commercial documents
Compound crime
single act produces two or more grave or less grave felonies
e.g. murder with multiple attempted murder; double murder
GR: manual firearm - one bullet — single act of pressing the trigger but that act produce 2 or more victims, it would result to a compound crime (because there is only one bullet)
EXCP: automatic firearm — single act of pressing the trigger produce 2or more victims, it would result to separate crimes (because there are separate bullets)
Special Complex Crime
Also called a composite crime.
2 or more crimes for which the law fixes a single penalty.
ang batas mismo ang magsasabi kung ano ang belonging sa special complex crime
naiiba rin siya sa penalty, kasi nasa batas na 'yung penalty.
Ex. Robbery with rape; serious illegal detention with rape
People v. Nuguid
Facts: Nuguid was charged of serious illegal detention with rape. Appellant and his companions were drinking at the house of Jun Rianzares. At around 2 AM, Jun left to see a friend. His wife, Rowena, and their daughter and son, were left behind sleeping inside the room of their house.
Issue: Whether it is a special complex crime of serious illegal detention with rape
Ruling: The main intent of Nuguid in trying to detain the victim in his room is to rape her but not to deprived her of her liberty. The act of detaining her is merely incidental to commit the right.
NOTE: For reckless imprudence, light and grave ma
1. Complex Crime Proper
i. David v. People, GR 208320, August 19, 2015
Facts: Hella learned that the petitioner had been misrepresenting the amounts she wrote on several Bureau of Customs (BOC) Form No. 38-A. Petitioner made it appear that payments of additional taxes were made to BOC, when in fact there was none. Petitioner falsified Land Bank commercial documents by making it appear that Hella was assessed additional customs duties totaling P855,995 for the release of its imports were misappropriated by petitioner for her own personal use and benefit to the damage and prejudice of Hella.
Issue: Whether the petitioner is guilty of the complex crime of estafa through Falsification of Commercial Documents
Ruling: Yes, the petitioner is guilty of the complex crime of estafa through Falsification of Commercial Documents.
2. Compound Crime
i. People v. Mores, GR 189846, June 26, 2013
Facts: Mores and was charged with complex crime of Murder with Multiple Attempted Murder for the death of Ramy Balasa and injuries of fourteen people. During arraignment Mores and Famor pleaded not guilty. Only Famor was able to present evidence.
Naghagis siya ng grenade sa auditorium.
Issue: Whether Ramil Mores is guilty of the complex crime of Murder with Multiple Attempted Murder
Ruling: Yes. Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code states that when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period. The penalty for the most serious crime of Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion perpetua to DEATH. But due to Republic Act No. 9346, the original penalty of death is modified to reclusion perpetua.
Article 11, RPC - Justifying Circumstances
Imputability
The quality by which an act may be ascribed to a person as its author or owner. It implies that the act committed has been freely and consciously done and may, therefore, be put down to the doer as his very own.
Responsibility
Is the obligation of suffering the consequences of crime. It is the obligation of taking the penal and civil consequences of the crime.
Imputability distinguished from responsibility
Imputability implies that a deed may be imputed to a person, responsibility implies that the person must take the consequence of such a deed.
Guilt
is an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be made to answer for the consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.
Justifying Circumstance
an excuse to criminal liability
Acts or circumstances that makes the act lawful
benefits: (1) no criminal liability (2) no civil liability
it's as if the accused did not commit any
AKA How to get away with murder š
6 Justifying Circumstances
Self-Defense
basis: self-preservation
Elements: URL
Unlawful aggression;
The most important/primordial element is the unlawful aggression. Why? Because it will be incomplete self defense if there is no unlawful aggression (the assault or threaten assault that is immediate danger)
Ex. shouting - no unlawful aggression
Attempt to stab you - there is unlawful aggression
Unlawful aggression - sudden, unexpected, and illegal attack/danger/peril
2 types of unlawful aggression
Actual/Material - there is actual physical force or attack
Imminent - attack/physical force is impending or at the point of happening basically sasaksakin ka pa lang. The attack must be OFFENSIVE AND POSITIVELY STRONG.
GR: The act of drawing a weapon is NOT an unlawful aggression. Hintayin mo raw na itutok mo 'yung baril.
EXCP: Trained police officer/any other authorities like NBI, Security Guard - the mere act of drawing a weapon is considered unlawful aggression. The person must be aware that the person is a trained police officer.
Paano pag naunahan ka? Malas mo na lang.
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;
It depends on the circumstances, age, gender, and the use of weapon
Ex. if it’s in a dark alley, a woman can use her knife, but if it’s in a public place where she can ask for help, there is no need to use a knife
it should be REASONABLE. Kapag sinapak ka, sapakin mo rin. Kapag sinapak ka, hindi pwedeng barilin mo.
There should be rational equivalence of the attack used. There should be equality between an attack and defense. But it is a case to case basis.
Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
The offended party should have not initiated the assault.
Ex. you insult a person in public — that’s a provocation on your part.
WALANG PROVOCATION
NOTE: When you chase your offender, there is an act of retaliation.
Soplente v. People
Facts: One of the victims died while the other one
The first case was filed frustrated homicide and homicide.
The defense of the accused was that there was an unlawful aggression as he was surrounded.
In the lower court, they invoke self-defense for the frustrated homicide
Issue: Whether the accused act in self-defense
Ruling: Yes. The unlawful aggression was the kicking of the victim and there was also a provocation on the other party.
Q: Is kicking an unlawful aggression?
A: Generally, no. But looking at the wider concept, the SC justified that it is.
Art. 247, RPC if you see your spouse having an intercourse with the opposite sex, you are not liable for killing them.
A has intent to kill B. A got his bolo and swung it at B. B nakailag. A run away. B chased him and stabbed him. There is no unlawful aggression anymore.
A and B wanted to park at SM. A mura mura B. B shot A. No unlawful aggression. Mere threat is not unlawful aggression.
People v. Roxas
People v. Roman
Facts: The accused was charged and convicted Murder.
Issue: Whether the accused invoked self-defense
Ruling:
U- there is no unlawful aggression, there was no attack coming from the victim
R- He stabbed him 7 times, that's not reasonable
L- It was the victim who provoked the incident.
Nacnac v. People
Facts: SPO1 and SPO2. SPO2 shoot SPO1 in the head because SPO1 hinugot baril sa gilid niya.
Issues: Whether SPO2 can invoke self-defense
Ruling: Yes.
U- It was only the accused who
R- There was only one shot in the head. Because out of instinct he did not have the time to decide
L- His order was lawful. He merely stop him. It was the victim who provoked.
Hence, the accused was acquitted of homicide.
Defense of Relative
Elements:
Unlawful aggression;
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;
If the provocation is given by the person being attacked, the person making defense had no part therein.--- no provocation.
Here provocation is immaterial. What is material is on the part of the relative.
Ex. father is in defense of his son
Q: What is the scope of “relative”?
SAD-Bro/SAC4
Spouse (asawa)
Ascendant (nanay, tatay, lolo, lola)
Descendants (anak mo, apo mo)
Brother
Sister
affinity (by marriage; in laws
Consanguinity by blood - 4th civil degree (1st cousin)
Article 11. Those who are in the 4th Sanguinity.
Second cousin are not included; they are strangers
People v. Agacer
U- There is no unlawful aggression on the part of the victim. In fact, it was them who provoked the victim.
R-
L-
Defense of Stranger
Elements:
Unlawful aggression;
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;
The person defending must NOT be induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive
There should be good will with no evil intent or something illegal.
Stranger- any person
Cabuslay v. People
Facts: Instead of an Identification Card, he pulled out yung baril niya raw. Binaril niya raw yung kapwa pulis.
Issue: Contention of the following justifying circumstances:
Self-defense, defense of a stranger, fulfillment of duty
Ruling:
U- there was no unlawful aggression on the part of the victim
R- he shot the victim 8 times
N- None. Because it was the police who provoked the event.
Avoidance of Greater Evil/State of Necessity
Elements:
That the evil sought to be avoided (prevent) actually exists
dapat hindi imaginary lang.
That the injury was feared to be GREATER than that done to avoid it.
No other practical/less harmful means of preventing the injury
Ex. a doctor who aborted an infant to save the mother or both will die without the consent of the husband but the imminence of time is important. Hence, the doctor should have the discretion. (a.k.a. Therapeutic abortion)
Ex. There is a fire in a neighborhood. They decided to destroy the house to avoid other houses from burning. Hence, no one should be unjustly enriched; there is civil liability.
Ex. There is a road. The Bus has 40 passengers. Ayaw magpreno. Namatay 3 people. Driver has no criminal liability but has a civil liability. Any person who benefits has civil liability.
Can we file a case? Kapag may krimen. Always, pwede.
Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of Rights
When your act is within the bounds of the fulfillment of duty, then you are not criminally liable.
Elements:
that the accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office;
that the injury or offense committed be the necessary consequence of his duty
There must be no negligence or imprudence
This is not limited to public individuals.
Ex. There is a jail guard. Their purpose is to maintain custody. Bunaril niya paa ng tumatakas.
Obedience to Order Issued by Superior for Some Lawful Purpose
Elements:
There is an order from a superior
There must be a lawful order
The means employed must be lawful.
Basically sinusunod mo yung superior. Kapag inutusan ka pumatay, hindi 'yun pwede.
R.A. No. 9262 – Battered Woman Syndrome
Refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.
There must be two cycles of abuse.
They have no civil and criminal liability even with the absence of the elements of self-defense.
People v. Genosa
Facts: Her husband would slap her. She would fight back. She would go to the house of her parents. Ben will reconcile with her.
One night Ben went home drunk and he chocked her and Marivic escaped to the children's room
Marivic killed Ben using a gun but based on the medical findings, it was the use of pipe that.
Marivic was charged with parricide. On her defense, she said that she invoked self-defense in relation to battered woman syndrome. Marivic admitted that she killed her husband but only because she was psychologically and physically abused for several years. She was convicted.
Issue: Whether battered woman's syndrome is present
Ruling: No. There was no unlawful aggression. At the time that she killed her husband, he was asleep. Thus, she was convicted of parricide.
3 Stages of Cycle of Violence:
Tension-building — minor battering (e.g. verbal abuse)
Acute-battering — violence; death dito na 'yung pambubugbog
Tranquil phase — promises/apology
Note: at least twice should they undergo a battering episode. Kailangan din na kasal kayo.
Sec. 3, RA 9262
"Battered Woman Syndrome" refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.
ARTICLE 11 BOOK NOTES
There must be actual physical force or actual use of weapons.
insulting words do not constitute unlawful aggression
However, a slap on the face constitute unlawful aggression since the face represents a person and his dignity slapping it is a serious personal attack.
A strong retaliation to injury or threat may amount to an unlawful aggression however retaliation is not self defense; It is not a justifying circumstance.
to constitute unlawful aggression there must be an actual sudden unexpected or imminent danger.
Saan mo ako aggression must come from the person who was attacked by that use
The fact that the accused declined to give any statement when she surrendered to a policeman it inconsistent with the plea of self defense
physical stock may determine whether the accused at the. self defense.
Unlawful aggression is still present even if the aggressor was disarmed if the aggressor still poses a threat to the lives of the accused; kapag nakuha na yung weapon ng aggressor pwede pa rin magkaroon ng unlawful aggression kung may threat pa rin siya
kapag tumakas yong accuse wala nang unlawful aggression
Retreat to make more advantageous position; shadows a victim para mas maging advantageous niya pwede pa rin magkaroon ng unlawful aggression continuing pa rin
walang unlawful aggression Kapag may agreement in dalawang party na may fight sila pero kailangan yung challenge ngayon is accepted nung isa hindi basta-basta na yung isa gusto lang siyang a challenge tapos na hindi pumayag hindi yun counted.
kaya may ganito kasi nawawala na yung unlawful aggression kasi awareness na sila na may fight na magaganap
unless mutual agreements as a fight tapos nag stipulate yung fight ahead of time that would be considered unlawful
Example: a&b wherein the office of division superintendent of schools a&b had an altercation. grab a good paper weight from a table and challenge b to go out to fight outside the building. A left the office, followed by b. whenThey were in front of the table of a clerk, b asked a to put down the paper weight but instead a grab the neck and color of the polo shirt of pi which was torn, beatbox a several times.
In this case the aggression made by which to place before he and we could go out of the building is unlawful notwithstanding their agreement to fight.
one who voluntarily joined a fight cannot clean self defense
Unlawful aggression is the defense of others rights:
defense of woman's honor
defense of property
defense of home
There is self defense even if the aggressor used a toy pistol provided the accused believe it was a real gun
NOTE: A mere threatening or intimidating attitude not preceded by an outward and material aggression is not unlawful aggression. However when intent to attack is manifest picking up a weapon is sufficient unlawful aggression. But aggression must be real not merely imaginary.
that is expected is still being provided it is imminent. Thus, it is not necessary to wait until the blow is about to be discharged because in order that the assault may be prevented it is not necessary that it has been actually perpetrated.
A public officer exceeding his authority may become an unlawful aggressor.
Reasonable necessity or means employed to repeal or prevent the act
Pag sinuntok ka hindi pwede ang self-defense mo ay pagpatay.
Perfect equality between the weapon used by the one defending himself and that of the aggressor is not required because the person assaulted did not have sufficient tranquility of mind to think to calculate and to choose which weapon to use
Knife = club; Firearm = dagger; pocket knife = cane; gun = bolo; bolo = knife
Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
There must be no provocation; the propagation was insufficient; the provocation was not given by the person defending himself; the propagation was given but it was not proximate and immediate to the act of aggression
The provocation is sufficient when:
When one challenges the disease to come out of the house and engage in a fist fight
when one hurl insults or inputs to another the other
when the accused tries to forcibly guess the sister of the disease
The provocation must be immediate and proximate for it to be considered by the court so kapag yung propagation nangyari two days prior the aggression hindi na counted
Flight is incompatible with self defense
Battered Woman Syndrome
This refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in pattern relationships as a result of cumulative abuse
A battered woman has been defined as a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to cause her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights. Battered women include wives or women in any form of intimate relationship with men.
they must undergo two battering cycles
Defense of relatives
Unlawful aggression exist if there was a mistake of fact
Example: A challenged B to a fight. A ran but he C, the father of A saw B chasing A with a bolo. C stabbed B. C is not liable but A is. Because he was the proximate cause.
Fulfillment of Duty
Shooting of a prisoner by guard must be in self-defense or be absolutely necessary to avoid his escape
shooting of an offender who refused to surrender is justified
but shooting at thief who refused to be arrested is not justified
Fulfillment of duty to prevent the escape of a prisoner is different from self defense because they are based on different principles the public officer acting in the fulfillment of a duty may appear to be an aggressor but his aggression is not enough with it being necessary to fulfill his duty
When the order is not for a lawful purpose to subordinate who obeyed it is criminally liable
Example falsification of document with full knowledge of its falsity
A soldier who obeyed his commander tortured to death the deceased
however the Subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior, if is not aware of the illegality of the order.
Exempting Circumstance (Article 12, RPC)
There is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which makes the act voluntary or negligent (may kulang na element)
The act is unlawful, thus there is a crime, there is a criminal
There is no criminal liability but there is civil liability
Exempting Circumstances
Imbecile or Insanity
Imbecility
mental age of the person
mental retardness whose age is at certain legal age, but his mind is similar to 2-7 years old. Thus, he lacks intelligence but the guardian
Idiot - 2 years old below; Moron is 12-14 years old above
Insanity
the accused must be completely deprived of intelligence ex. schizophrenia
What point in time? immediately before or during the crime commission.
not automatically exempted. It is a mental illness. They may have a lucid interval - period of time under which an insane may have a rational thinking/he is of sound mind
Minority ( 15 year old and below)
make use of chronological age
RA 9344 - age was raised to 15. They are automatically exempted. They do not have intelligence. They will be subjected to an intervention program so they can correct the child.
They are called “Child in conflict with the law”
The parents are civilly liable
Minority (15 yrs and 1 day but under 18) + w/o discernment
make use of chronological age
It is conditional. It is the element of discernment.
discernment - mental ability to determine what is right and wrong
If crime is below 6 years and 1 day, they can apply for aversion program
If the crime is above 6 years and 1 day, the application for aversion program is discretionary
Aversion program is a program by the DSWD that the child will be transferred to bahay pag-asa and undergo certain corrective program and be re-assess if he can be
They will be subjected to an intervention program
The parents are civilly liable
Accident
Elements:
performing a lawful act
with due care
injury cause by mere accident
not motivated by any fault or intention
Exemption to exempting circumstances. The person is exempted from both criminal and civil liability provided that it was a pure accident
Accident - are occurrences that happens outside mens rea Requisites: the act must be committed lawfully
Ex. A—B are friends. They got a permit to hunt in the wild. There, they see a chicken and behind the chicken is a rock. B went behind pero nag reflect yung bala. Namatay si B.
People v. Agliday
Facts: There were two eyewitnesses; homemade guns.
The accused is a brgy tanod, and he was just cleaning for his later work.
Issue: Whether he can invoke accident
Ruling:
a carrying unlicensed gun is unlawful
b there was no due care in handling the gun
c
d
Hence, he was not able to satisfy the elements of accident.
Under the compulsion of irresistible force (VIOLENCE)
There is no element of freedom
Elements:
Compulsion is by means of PHYSICAL FORCE (not mere threat)
That the physical force is irresistible
that the physical first came from a third person
Ex. A pointed a gun at B directing him to get the bag of C. B got the bag of C. B had no other alternative but he is exempted from liability.
Napilitan lang siya na gawin
People v. Anod
Facts: They were having a drinking spree. He was only forced by the victim.
Issue: Whether accused can invoke irresistible force
Ruling: No. There was force, but there was no irresistible force.It was not enough to compel. He had other options like he could run away, he could have challenged the accused since he was also holding a knife.
Under impulse of uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury (THREAT)
Due to uncontrollable fear
Elements:
the existence of an uncontrollable fear;
that the fear must be real and imminent; and
the fear of an injury is greater than or at least equal to that committed.
Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some insuperable clause
Elements:
law requiring an act to be done
failure to do the act
due to any lawful justifiable reason/s
no civil and criminal liability
People v. Bandian
Issue: Whether there was insuperable cause
Ruling: Yes. She was sufferring from debility and could not bring her child to her home. She was only 23 years old. Primi para- first time manganak. She was uneducated.
Absolutory causes – where the act committed is a crime, but for some reason of public policy and sentiment, there is not penalty imposed. Exempting and justifying circumstances are absolutory causes.
Justifying Circumstance
Exempting Circumstance
Lawful Act
Unlawful Act
There is no civil and criminal liability
No criminal liability but has civil liability
EXCP: if it’s an accident
Needs clear and convincing evidence
Note: it is the duty of the defense to prove this evidence
There is absence of intelligence, freedom, and negligence.
ARTICLE 12 BOOK NOTES
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
The burden of proof is on the defense or the defendant which must be satisfied in court
Imbecile v. insanity
The imbecile is exempt in all cases from the criminal liability well the insane is not exempt if it can be shown that he acted during a lucid interval
To constitute insanity there must be complete deprivation of the intelligence or that there be a total deprivation of the freedom of the will
the court shall order His confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums and he cannot leave without first obtaining the permission of the court but the court has no power to permit the insane person without first obtaining the opinion of the director of health that he may be released without danger
sanity is considered the normal condition of the human mind
To establish if the person is insane there should be an examination before and after the commission of the crime we read the thoughts the motives and emotions of the accused to establish if he is sane
If he was insane during trial but sane during the commission of the crime he is still criminally liable Is insane siya before the commission of the crime that's not considered
Epilepsy may be covered by the term insanity
feeble-mindedness is not city because the offender could distinguish right from wrong an empty cell or an insane cannot distinguish right from wrong
crazy is not synonymous with insane
pedo philia is not insanity; amnesia is not proof of mental condition of the accused failure to remember is in itself no proof of the mental condition of the accused when the crime was performed
Other cases of lack of intelligence:
committing a crime while in a dream sleepwalking where the acts of the person afflicted or automatic is embrace in the plea of insanity and must be clearly proven
hypnotism is so effective as tomato subject act during artificial sleepwalking is still a debatable question
committing a crime while suffering from malignant malaria because it causes
The exempting circumstances of insanity or imbecility is based on the complete absence of intelligence as element of voluntariness
Age of absolute irresponsibility based to 15 years of age
A child in conflict with the law is a person who at time of the commission of the offense is below 18 years old but less than 15 years and 1 day old.
discernment means the capacity of the child at the time of the commission of the offense to understand the difference between right and wrong and the consequences of the wrongful act.
Discernment v. Intent
Intent refers to the desired act of the person while the servant relates to the moral significance that the person ascribes to the setup hands a person may not intend to shoot another but may be aware of the consequences of his negligent act.
Discernment may be shown by (1) the manner the crime was committed (2) the conduct of the offender after its commission
The allegation of with intent to kill in the information is efficient allocation of discernment
Accident
The person must be performing a lawful act
Striking another with a gun in self defense even if it fired and seriously injured the assailant is a lawful act
An accident is something that happens outside the sway of our will and although it comes about through some act of our will lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. If the consequences are foreseeable it is negligence.
What accident is NOT:
Repeated blows the game of one thing by mere accident
accidental shooting is negated by threatening words proceeding it and still aiming the gun at the prostate body of the victim instead of immediately helping him
Basis: There's a lack of negligence and intent.
Irresistible force
Before a force can be considered to be an irresistible force, it must produce such an effect upon the individual that, in spite of all resistance, it reduces him to a mere instrument and is incapable of committing a crime.
If the accused was threatened by a gun but was also holding a why rifle, then there is no irresistible force.
Passion or obfuscation IS NOT an irresistible force. Because irresistible force comes from a third person.
Basis: Complete absence of freedom.
Uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury
Force is a valid defense
A threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion must be of such a character as to leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or for self-defense.
Intimidation is not valid.
In the eyes of the law nothing will excuse the act of joining an enemy but the fear of immediate death
speculative fanciful and remote fear is not uncontrollable fear
Irresistible fear v. uncontrollable fear
The sender uses violence or physical force to compel another person to commit a crime; in the Uncontrollable fear the offender employs intimidation or threat in compelling another to commit a crime
Basis: complete absence of freedom
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus — an act done by me against my will is nor my act
Lawful or insuperable cause
Ex. Arbitrary detention– kaso malayo so hindi umabot. The distance was the lawful cause so the officer is not liable.
Ex. Debility exempts the mother from bringing her child to her home.
In all exempting circumstances, intent is wanting in the agent of the crime.
Mitigating Circumstances (Article 13)
with criminal and civil liability but has a decreased penalty
Makes the person criminally liable but it has the effect of reducing the penalty or criminal liability by degree or period.
2 main types of mitigating circumstances:
Ordinary
set the penalty in its minimum period
e.g. reclusion temporal in its minimum
can be offset (negate) by an aggravating circumstances
Privileged
set the penalty by degrees lower
e.g. reclusion temporal to prision mayor can be 1-3 degrees lawyer
cannot be offset by an aggravating circumstance
Mitigating circumstances
1.Incomplete Justifying or Exempting circumstances
Majority of the element - PMC
ex. URL - 2 must be present
Minority of the element - OMC
ex. URL -
2.Under 18 and over 70 years of age
above 15 years old below 18 with discernment = PMC
How will you know if there is discernment? Mga workers ang mag-determine niyan.
Ex. Honor student - ibig sabihin may discernment siya. Alam niya kung ano ang mali at tama
over 70 years old = OMC
3. No intention to commit so grave a wrong (Praeter Intentionem)
Ex. Intention lang niya sampalin pero namatay.
There must be a notable disparity between the means employed and the resulting crime.
People v. Flores (OMC)
4. Sufficient provocation or threat
Elements: SOI
Provocation or threat is sufficient
Provocation or threat from the offended party
Provocation or threat must be immediate (NO sufficient interval of time) to the crime
People v. Pagal
5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
Elements:
Victim committed a grave offense
Against the offender or offenders SAD/BRO SA
Crime must be a proximate vindication of the grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation
are overwhelming EMOTIONS that may cloud one's judgment
Elements:
the act (of the victim is unlawful and sufficient to produce passion or obfuscation
act must NOT be far removed from the crime commission; no sufficient interval of time
People v. Comillo
Issue: Whether there is passion or obfuscation
Ruling: No. The victim did not do an unlawful act.
7. Voluntary Surrender
Elements:
Must NOT be actually arrested
Surrender must be to a person in authority or agent of a person in authority
individuals that directly vested with jurisdiction (authority to govern)
e.g. Mayor, punong barangay, SK
agents — maintenance of peace and order
e.g. police, patrol officers, brgy tanod, soldiers
private individuals ARE not included; security guard
Surrender is voluntary
Spontaneous (automatic) and shows intent to unconditionally submit himself to the authorities because:
acknowledges his guilt; or
wishes to save to government of expenses of trying to find you
People v. Mallari
Facts: The accused ran over the victim and instead of stopping the truck, he proceeded to the Municipal Hall where he surrendered.
He was charged and convicted with murder.
Issue: Whether voluntary surrender is present in the case
Ruling: Yes. It was done spontaneously and the requisites were satisfied.
Luces v. People
Facts: He stabbed the victim and he died. He found out that he was being looked for. He went into hiding but surrendered after a while.
Issue: Whether he voluntarily surrendered
Ruling: No. The main intent of the accused was to disclaim the accusation against him. His surrender was not voluntary.
People v. Agacer
Issue: Whether the accused voluntarily surrendered
Ruling: No. The interval of time was already 14 days before they went to the police station.
8. Voluntary confession
Elements:
confession is voluntary
before a court with proper jurisdiction
to the crime charged/filed
before the presentation of the prosecution's evidence
People v. Dawaton
Facts: They consumed 4 bottles of gin. On the second venue, they consumed 1. The victim was sleeping on a pagpag. The accused went home and returned with the knife. He then stabbed the victim on the base of his neck. The victim said,
"Bakit Pare, bakit?"
He was charged and convicted with murder. He pleaded not guilty then he offered to plead guilty with homicide. The prosec denied it.
Issue:
Whether he is entitled to the voluntary confession
Whether there is the mitigating circumstance of intoxication
Ruling: No. For an offense to enter a plea of guilty. It was not what was charged.
9. Physical defect and illness
illness that diminishes the exercise of will-power
NOT deprived of the consciousness of his acts
People v. Javier
Facts: The accused killed his wife. He also suffered from an injury in the abdomen. He contended that he was insane. He remembered the events that had happened. Before the event, he was suffering from insomnia.
Issue: Whether insomnia may be invoked as a mitigating circumstances
Ruling: No. It is not an illness that diminished his will-power. He was also able to remember the events. There were no records that he was insane. He was not deprived of his awareness of the crime.
10. Other analogous (similar) circumstances
People v. Macbul
Facts: He stole papers amounting to 10 pesos. He did that to feed his children.
Issues: Whether he is entitled to the mitigating circumstances of poverty and necessity
Ruling: Yes. The right to life is greater than the right to property. There was the cataclysm that led to extreme poverty.
People v. Verges
Facts: Mario and 11 others were charged with murder for the death of the 5 accused. They were being transferred, while passing through Dormitory 4-C, they were attacked. It lasted to 2-3 minutes. They were fatally stabbed on the different stabs on their body. They pleaded not guilty.
5 died and the rest plead guilty to the crime.
Issue: Whether the voluntary surrender of weapon can be considered as a mitigating circumstance
Ruling: No. Merely surrendering the weapon is not a mitigating circumstance. The weapons were confiscated and discovered, not voluntarily surrendered. The Supreme Court is not yet prepared to accept it as a mitigating circumstance.
People v. Genosa
Facts: Marivic killed her husband due to abuse.
Issue: Whether there is the mitigating circumstances of passion or obfuscation and BWS
Ruling: Yes. It is similar to an illness that may diminish one's control. Right now, because we already have a RA 9262, it is already a justifying circumstance.
Article 13 BOOK NOTES
Mitigating circumstances only reduce the penalty, but do not change the nature of the crime.
No intention to commit so grave a wrong
This is applicable when there is a notable and evident disproportion between the means employed to execute the criminal act and its consequences
Example:
husband punch his wife and she died;
accused stabbed the victim on his arm but due to the lack of medical treatment has died
The policeman boxed the prisoner and the prisoner collapsed.
the intention as an internal act is george only by the proportion of the means employed by him to the evil produced by his act but also by the fact that the blow was or was not aimed at a vital part of the body
Considerations to established if there was an intent to kill:
The weapon used
the part of the body injured
the injury inflicted;
and the manner it is inflicted
Brute force is not applicable for mitigating circumstances
Ex. Bata chinoke mo tapos namatay
The mitigating circumstance of lack of intent cannot be appreciated in murder qualified by treachery
In cases of defamation or slander mitigating circumstances cannot be considered.
Mitigating circumstances applicable for malversation.
Basis: Intent is diminished
Sufficient provocation or threat
Provocation is understood as any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone
The word sufficient means adequate to excite a person to commit the wrong and must accordingly be proportionate to its gravity
Ex. kicking, cursing, abuse
Wife cheated, he killed her
Fight
Latter hit the accused in the eye
Victim curse and kick the accused
Threatening to kill him and hacking the bamboo walls of his house
Where provocation is NOT sufficient:
Asking the accused why he bad mouth the girls
The victim pointed a finger on the accused and said, ‘dont u know we are watching for honeymooners here?’
Deceased had ordered the arrest of the accused
Blowing of horns and cutting lanes, overtaking
Provocation must originate from the offended party
Provocation must be immediate to the commission of the crime
Basis: Diminished intelligence and intent
Immediate vindication of a grave offense
Ex. Being humiliated/embarrased
Stabbing the accused’s son to death
Where vindication is NEGATED:
9 months deceased boxed with the accused
In the morning, the victim insulted the accused, in the afternoon
3 months later, the accused stabbed the victim who insulted his daughter.
Provocation v. Vindication
Provocation
Vindication
Made directly to the accused
Made to the accused or to SAD-Bro/SA
Grave offense
No need to be grave offense
Immediately precedes the act
May interval pero it needs to be proximate
What is considered grave offense:
Insulting the accused that he was leeching his wife
“You are a japanese spy”
Catching a man making an attempt on his wife
Insulting his son
The propagation should be proportionate to the damage caused by the act and adequate is stir one to its commission
Basis: Diminished conditions of voluntariness
Vindication of a grave offense and passion or obfuscation CANNOT be counted separately
Passion or obfuscation
There is no passion or obfuscation after 24 hours or several hours or half an hour. It should be acting ON IMPULSE.
It may build up and strengthen over time.
Examples:
Acting upon jealousy
Acting upon seeing someone steal your carabao
When the deceased boxed with his 4 years old child
Exercise of a right or fulfillment of duty is NOT a proper source or passion or obfuscation
Where passion or obfuscation IS NOT considered
Passion arising from immoral passions
Killing the parents of your gf because the object with your relationship
Excitement from wrestling
Where passion or obfuscation is considered
Rivalry over a girl
Passion or obfuscation MUST originate from lawful sentiments NOT revenge or lawlessness
The offender must act under the impulse of special motives
The CAUSE producing passion or obfuscation must come from the victim.
The belief of passion or obfuscation may arise from good faith
Basis: diminished intelligence and intent
Vindication of grave offense cannot co-exist with passion and obfuscation but it is compatible with lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.
It is also incompatible with treachery
Voluntary Surrender
There should be no pending warrant of arrest or information filed for it to be appreciated.
Examples:
The accused chasing the victim with a bolo and upon seeing the policeman, he let go of the bolo and raised his hands
Hiding from the relatives of the victim and voluntarily surrendering and admitting to the crime
After shooting the victim, he called the police on him
He fled the scene but immediately surrendered to the police
The warrant of arrest was not served yet
The probable cause was determined but no warrant of arrest yet
9 hours after the incident, he surrendered
Cases not constituting voluntary surrender
Warrant of arrest and the accused was arrested
Surrendered after the warrant of arrest
There is already a pending warrant of arrest
2 years and five months after the issuance of a warrant of arrest
Refusing to surrender
Search lasted for 4 years before surrendering
No evidence showing that he willfully surrendered
Where the accused merely went to the police station to report an incident
It is not mitigating when he was in fact arrested.
The surrender is mitigating when the warrant of arrest had not been served or not returned unserved because the accused cannot be located, the surrender is mitigating
What voluntary surrender IS NOT:
Surrendering weapons
When he accompanied the chief of police to the scene of the crime without admitting to the crime
Person in authority — has the authority to maintain public order and the protection and security of life and property and any person who is an aid to an authority.
It must be spontaneous
Kapag nag-surrender kasi natakot sa retaliation ng relatives ng pinatay, hindi counted
Nag-surrender ka kasi mahuhuli ka na, hindi rin counted.
Basis: lesser perversity of the offender
Plea of guilty
The plea must be made before the trial begins and must be made before the presentation of evidence by the prosecution
Plea of guilty on appeal is not mitigating
When he pleas guilty his death turns to life imprisonment
The accused is entitled to a mitigating circumstances when he pleas guilty to the amended information
The plea of guilty MUST be on the offense charged
Basis: lesser perversity of the offender
Physical defect
Deaf and dumb — in robbery
Educated or not they are entitled to a mitigating circumstances
Armless, crippled, or a stutterer —HOWEVER, it must be shown that their defect limited his means to act, defend himself, or communicate with his fellow beings.
Basis: no complete freedom of action; diminished voluntariness.
Illness
Lost the exercise of will-power
Examples:
Mother with puerperal fever killed her child
Killing of witches is for the common good
Mild behavior disorder
Feeble-mindedness
Schizo-affective
Kleptomania
Basis: Diminished intent and intelligence
Other analogous circumstances
CLASS NOTES
ARTICLE 14, RPC
KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Ordinary
sets the penalty in its maximum period
Can be offset by MC
Qualifying aggravating circumstances
Changes the nature of the crime
Special
Sets the penalty in its maximum period
CANNOt be offset by MC
Ex. Art 48 - Complex Crimes
Extraordinary
Provides additional penalty
Ex. Habitual delinquency
Aggravating Circumstances
That advantage be taken by the offender of his PUBLIC POSITION
That the crime be committed in contempt of or WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
Public authorities - persons or individuals who are directly vested with jurisdiction or those who have the authority to govern.
That the act be committed:
with insult or in disregard of the respect due to the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex,
Young or old sex
Sex - ONLY females
or that it be committed in the DWELLING of the offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.
Dwelling – it refers to any structure habitually used for rest, comfort, privacy, or peace of person.
IN SHORT, BAHAY
That the act be committed with:
abuse of confidence or
obvious ungratefulness
Mga walang utang na loob
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.
Church, mosk
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 an offense it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band.
It must facilitate, sought for, or taken advantage of the offender.
Nighttime - you commit it at night
Uninhabited places - a place where there are no houses or no persons. MGA LIBLIB NA LUGAR
Band - more than three armed persons who participated/committed in the commission of the crime.
That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
Whether man made or natural
That the crime be committed with the aid of:
armed men or
persons who insure or afford impunity.
“Aid of” - ang participation is only an accomplice
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 judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code.
That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
Ex. Giving reward ng 10 M para patayin mo yung tao
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.
great waste and ruin - excessive damage
That the act be committed with evident premeditation.
Elements:
The time when the offender determined the commission of the crime
Acts showing that the offender has clung to his determination to commit the crime
There must be sufficient lapse of time from the determination to the commission of the crime.
BASICALLY, basta may plano. PLANNING.
That craft, fraud, or disguise be employed.
Craft - intellectual trickery; pagpapanggap
Fraud - the use of insidious words; gagamit ka ng pambobola
Disguise - concealment of identity; any means to conceal you identity.
That:
advantage be taken of superior strength, or
Dapat mapakita na may superior strength and he took advantage of it
means be employed to weaken the defense.
Ex. Binato mo ng sand yung victim para hindi makakita
That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
Treachery - employing any means to ensure the commission or execution of the crime without the risk arising from the offended party.
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.
That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
MORAL SUFFERING – if you add insult to the victim
That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
Ex. Pumasok ka sa loob ng bintana
That as a means to the commission of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar means.
That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission.
CRUELTY - physical suffering
You try to slowly kill the victim
Dahan dahan mong pinahirapan ang victim
BOOK NOTES
Aggravating Circumstances
Opposite of mitigating circumstances
There is a crime and it makes the act more graver increasing the penalty in its maximum period
ARTICLE 14. Aggravating Circumstances. — The following are aggravating circumstances:
Taking advantage of public position
That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.
Applicable when the offender is a public officer.
Ask the question: Did the accused abuse his office in order to commit the crime?
Example:
policeman on guard duty
Shooting of complainant
taking advantage of public position is present when the accused use their authority as members of the police and constabulary to disarm the victim before shooting him
When a counselor collects fines and misappropriate them
a policeman abducting a girl by availing himself of his position
a chief of police during the search of a both by means of intimidation obtain money from the proof
Kahit na of duty siya kapag aware yung victim na pulis man siya pwede pa rin siya ma charge
Failure in official duties is tantamount to abuse of office
Hindi siya considered as an aggravating circumstance kapag yung pagiging officer is an integral part or element of the kind example: malversation
it's also not aggravating if you didn't use his public office or he had committed the crime without occupying police position
Contempt or insult of public authority
That the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the public authorities.
Basis: Lack of respect to public authorities
Requisites
That the public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions.
That he who is engaged in the exercise of said functions is not the person against whom the crime is committed.
The offender knows him to be a public authority.
His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the criminal act.
A public authority or a person in authority is a public officer who is directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the power to govern and execute the laws. The counselor, the mayor and the governor are persons in authority.
This is not applicable when the crime is committed in the presence of an agent only
A teacher is not a public authority
The crime should not be committed against the public authority
knowledge that a public authority is present is essential
The presence of public authority has not prevented offender from committing the crime
Disrespect due to Rank, Age, and Sex
That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due to the offended party on 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.
This for circumstances can be considered single or together. if all the four circumstances are present they have the weight of ONE aggravating circumstances only.
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the personal circumstances of the offended party and the place of the commission of the crime
this is applicable only to crimes against persons or honor
Pag may ninakaw sa president hindi sya bilang dito sa aggravating circumstances na ito kasi same parin naman yung value anong bagay kahit na it belongs to the president doesn't make it more valuable
There must be the evidence that in the commission of the crime, the accused deliberately intended to offend or insult the sex or age of the offended party
Examples of rank:
a private citizen who attacked and injured a person in authority
a pupil who attack and injured his teacher
the killing of a judge because he was strict or because of resentment
Rank
Refers to a high social position or standing as a grade in the armed forces or to a grade of official standing or social position or station for the order or trees in which set offices are placed in the army and navy in relation to others.
Kailangan dito patunayan na may disrespect talaga sa mismong rank para makonsensya aggravating circumstance
Examples of the age of the offended party:
A father of the offender
When a person killed was eight years old and very weak
When the victim was 65 while the offenders were 32 and 27
The accused was the grandson of the victim
When the victim is only 3 years old
Is there is no fat or intention that cannot be considered as an activating circumstances of age or sex
Examples of the sex of the offended party:
This is only applicable for females
when a man forces a woman to go to his house
killing a female relative
direct assault upon a lady teacher
Examples of the sex of the offended party IS NOT:
When the offender acted with passion and OBFUSCATION
When there exists a relationship between the offended party and the offender
with the condition of being a woman is indispensable in the commission of a crime like parricide rape abduction or seduction. sex is not aggravating
disregard of sex absorbed TREACHERY
that the victim be committed in the dwelling of the offended party
Dwelling must be a building or structure, exclusively for rest and comfort
Basis: Based on the greater perversity of the offender as shown by the face of the commission of the offense.
Dwelling is considered an aggravating circumstance primarily because of the sanctity of privacy the law accords to human abode.
One’s dwelling place is a sanctuary worthy of respect and that one who slanders another in the latter's house is more guilty than he who offends him elsewhere
Dwelling includes dependency, the foot of the staircase, and enclosure under the house.
When dwelling is an aggravating circumstance:
When the offender abuse of confidence as the victim opens the door for him
When the offender trespass with violence or against the will of the owner
Shooting the victim from outside
Crime began in the dwelling
In either of the two houses of the victim
When dwelling is NOT an aggravating circumstance:
When both offender and victim are occupants of the same house
When the offender or victim is the servant in the house
When the robbery is committed by the force upon things. dwelling is inherent.
EXCEPT: if it is robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons since dwelling is NOT an element of the crime.
When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediate provocation
When the dwelling where the crime was committed did not belong to the offended party
When the husband killed his estranged wife in the house solely occupied by her
Note: The offended party must not give provocation. how will we know if the offended party gave provocation?
Given by the owner of the dwelling
Sufficient, and
Immediate to the commission of the crime
There must be a close relation between provocation and commission of a crime in dwelling. If provocation is not immediate, dwelling is not aggravating.
Ex. Binastos mo ‘yung anak ng offender tapos agad-agad kang pinasok sa bahay mo at sinaksak ka. Walang dwelling doon kasi ikaw yung nag-provoke.
Prosecution must prove that no propagation was given by the offended party; it cannot be assumed.
When dwelling is an aggravating circumstance even though the crime was committed not in their dwelling:
The victim was raped in her boarding house
The victim was rape in their paternal home where she was a guest.
EXCP: if you are a mere visitor
The victim was killed in the house of her aunt where she was living with her niece— temporary dwelling
Victim was sleeping as guests in the house of another person
In case of adultery when is dwelling aggravating:
YES - if the wife and her paramour did it in the home of her husband
NO - if both the wife and the paramour are also living in the home.
Note: Dwelling is not included in treachery.
Abuse of Confidence and Obvious Ungratefulness
That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness.
Basis: On the greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the means and ways employed
Abuse of Confidence
There is abuse of confidence when the offended party has trusted the offender who later abuses such trust by committing the crime.
Requisites:
That the offended party has trusted the offender.
That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party.
That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime.
When abuse of confidence is NOT aggravating:
Master made advances to his servant. Servant fled. He chased her and killed her. The confidence was already lost before he killed her.
Betrayal of confidence of the parents
A domestic servant killing the child.
Note: The confidence between the offender and the offended party must be immediate and personal.
Where abuse of confidence is inherent:
Malversation
Qualified theft
Estafa by conversion or misappropriation
Qualified seduction
Obvious Ungratefulness
Accused killed his father-in-law who took care of him
Security guard killing a bank officer and robbed the bank
Victim was attacked while serving coffee and bread to the accused.
Visitor committing robbery or theft
Commission of crime in certain places
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.
Basis: The greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the place of the commission of the crime, which must be respected.
Kapag nangyari yung crime sa malacaƱang palace or sa church automatic na aggravating agad
Kapag nangyari yung crime sa presence ng chief executive , whether he is doing his official function or not, automatic na aggravating
Pero kapag other public authorities kailangan engage sila sa performance ng duty.
Ex. Committing a crime in the adjoining room of the courtroom after the hearing was adjourned. Hindi na siya considered as aggravating.
An electoral precinct during election day is a place where public authorities are engage in the discharge of their duties does it is aggravating
Place dedicated for religious worship
Cemeteries are NOT a place for religious worship.
NOTE: Kailangan maipakita na may intention siyang i-commit ‘yung krimen kapag pumasok siya sa church, malacanang palace, or kung saan engaged ang public authorities sa kanila duties.
Nighttime, Uninhabited Place, and Band
That the crime be committed in the night time, 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 an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band.
Basis: On the time and place of the commission of the crime means and ways employed.
These circumstances are considered SEPARATELY.
Requisites:
When it facilitated the commission of the crime; or
When especially sought for by offender to insure the commission of the crime or for the purpose of impunity
When the offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity.
If the accused took advantage of the darkness, only then can it be recognized as aggravating.
Ex. A intended to kill B and had hidden behind a tree and availed himself of the darkness to prevent him from being recognized or to escape more readily. As soon as B came, A stabbed him to death.
They are aggravating when they are specially sought for or when the offender took advantage thereof.
Circumstance of nocturnity, although not specifically sought for by the culprit, shall aggravate his criminal liability if it facilitated the commission of the offense or the offender took advantage of the same to commit the crime.
Examples of aggravating Nighttime, Uninhabited Place, and Band:
The offender specially salt for night time, when he sought for it in order to realize that crime with ease
When the accused waited for the night before committing robbery with homicide
when the accused lingered for almost three hours in the evening at the restaurant before carrying out their plan to rob it
When the offender waits for the victim to be asleep
Examples of NOT aggravating Nighttime, Uninhabited Place, and Band:
The crime was committed at night upon a mere casual encounter
Collisions of vehicles merely incidentally occurred at night.
Nighttime
The period of darkness begins at the end of dusk and ends at dawn. nights are from sunset to sunrise.
Night time is only aggravating when it is specially sought for by the offender or taken advantage of by him to facilitate the commission of the crime or to ensure his immunity from capture.
The offense must be actually committed in the darkness of the night
Lighting of a matchstick or use of flashlights does not negate the aggravating circumstance of nighttime
Test for nocturnity:
(1) objective test — if it facilitates the commission of the offense
(2) subjective test — it is purposely sought by the offender
Examples of NOT aggravating Nighttime:
Alleging nighttime in the information is not sufficient to consider it aggravating
It is not aggravating when the crime began at daytime
When the place of the crime is illuminated by light
Uninhabited place
The place is uninhabited not by the distance of the nearest house to the scene of the crime, but in the place of its commission, there was a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help.
Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal purpose either (1) To an easy and an interrupted accomplishment of their criminal designs, or (2) to ensure concealment of the offense away from detection and punishment. If either of these is not present it is not aggravating.
Examples of uninhabited place as aggravating:
A crime committed during night time in a sugarcane plantation about a hundred meters from the nearest house and the sugarcane in the field was tall enough to obstruct the view of neighbors and passerby
Inside a basketball court where no people can hear the victims scream
Time was committed in the open sea where no help could be expected by the victim from other persons and the offenders could easily escape from punishment.
About a kilometer from the nearest house
In an abandoned subdivision
when the victims are the occupants of the only house in that place, the crime is committed in uninhabited place
Band
Whenever more than three-armed malefactors should have acted together in the commission of an offense shall be deemed to have been committed by a band.
If only one of them committed the crime while the others were not aware of the commission of the crime it cannot be a band. They should act together.
If there are 20 persons and only three are armed it cannot be considered as a band
Stone is considered as an arm
All the armed men, at least four in number, must take direct part in the execution of the act constituting the crime.
When a band is NOT aggravating:
In the crime of rape committed by four armed persons
In the crime of brigandage
On occasion of calamity or misfortune
That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
Basis: reference to the time of the commission of the crime.
Reason: In the midst of a great calamity, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune to despoil them.
The offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune
chaotic condition after liberation is not aggravating?
Examples of calamity or misfortune as aggravating:
Fireman committing robbery in a burned house.
A thief who steals personal property after a typhoon
Aid of armed men and aid of persons who insure or afford impunity
That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity.
Basis: on the means and ways of committing the crime
Requisites:
That armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly.
That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was committed.
Armed men must act as accomplices only.
Except: When both the accused and the victim are armed.
A band and with the aid of armed men cannot be taken separately. Aid of armed men may be absorbed by a band or not if there were only three armed men and one can be considered as an aid only.
Recidivist
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 judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code.
Basis: the greater perversity of the offender, as shown by his inclination to crimes.
Recidivism must be taken into account as an aggravating circumstance no matter how many years have intervened between the first and second felonies.
A pardon does not obliterate the fact that accused was a recidivist; but amnesty extinguishes the penalty of its effect.
Recidivist
Is 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:
That the offender is on trial for an offense;
Time of trial math time of the commission of a crime
this means the date of arraignment
That he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime;
A judgment becomes final when:
after the lapse of the period for perfecting appeal
when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served
the accused has waived in writing his right to appeal
the accused has applied for probation
That both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same title of the code;
When one offense is punishable by an ordinance or special law and the other by the rpc, the two offenses are not embraced in the same title of the code
That you can be convicted of the new offense.
Reiteracion (Habituality)
That the offender has been previously punished by 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.
Basis: the greater perversity of the offender, as shown by his inclination to crimes.
If it is the previous crime was against property and the current offense is murder, it might not be considered as aggravating.
Requisites:
That the accused is on trial for an offense;
That he previously served sentence for another offense to which the law attaches and equal or greater penalty, or for two or more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty than that for the new offense;
Has been previously been punished means that he has SERVED sentence
Kailangan at least equal or greater ‘yung penalty ng first offense kesa sa second offense para ma consider ang reiteracion or kapag may na commit na siyang dalawang light offenses may reiteracion pa rin.
What we consider is the penalty ATTACHED to the offense not the penalty IMPOSED.
that he is convicted of the new offense.
Difference between recidivism and reiteracion:
recidivism
reiteracion
Offender was given final judgment
Offender has served sentence
Requires that the offenses be included in the same title of the code
Previous and subsequent offense must not be embraced in the same title of the code
Does always be taken into consideration in fixing the penalty to be imposed upon the accused
It is not always an aggravating circumstance
Four forms of repetition:
Recidivism - generic aggravating circumstance
Reiteracion or habituality – generic aggravating circumstance
Multi-recidivism or habitual delinquency – Extraordinary aggravating circumstance
Quasi-recidivism – special aggravating circumstance
Habitual delinquency
When a person, within a period of 10 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 any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
Quasi-recidivism
Any person who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the same, shall be punished by the maximum penalty prescribed by law for the new felony.
In consideration of price, reward, or promise
That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
Basis: on the perversity of the offender, as shown by the motivating power itself.
The one who gives or offers the price or promise and the one who accepts it are both principals of the crime.
By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosive, etc
That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
Basis: has reference to means and ways employed.
Kailangan mapatunayan na may INTENT to kill ‘yung offender gamit ito. Kung hindi, there would be separate offenses.
By means of fire:
With intent to kill thru fire - aggravating
Killed the victim then burned the house - 2 crimes
Intent to burn the house but also killed a person - arson. Homicide is absorbed.
By means of explosion:
RA 8294 added the use of unlicensed explosives as one of the aggravating circumstances
With intent to kill – murder
Without intent to kill – destruction
By means of derailment of locomotive:
Which defines and penalizes the crime of damage two means of communication, derailment of cars, condition collision or accident must result from damage to a railway, telegraph, or telephone lines.
Crime committed as a result of the derailment of cars only property is damaged — damage to means of communication
Without intent to kill– complex crime of damage to means of communication with homicide
There was an intent to kill– murder
Evident premeditation
That the act be committed with evidence premeditation.
Basis: to the ways of committing the crime, because evident premeditation implies a deliberate planning of the act before executing it.
The essence of premeditation is that the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by cool thought and reflection abunda resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space of time sufficient to carry out a calm judgment.
It is NOT aggravating when it is a result of rising temper or when the attack was made in the heat of anger
Requisites:
The prosecution must prove —
The time when the offended determined to commit the crime;
An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination; and
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.
Premeditation must be evident. Mere threats or grudge are NOT sufficient.
The offender must have a cold and deep meditation and tenacious persistence in the accomplishment of the criminal act. Mere determination to commit the crime does not of itself establish evident premeditation.
Evident premeditation and price oor reward can co-exist. BUT it is absorbed by reward or promise applicable to the inductor.
When the victim is different:
When they kill the wrong victim – not aggravating
When they intended to kill anyone who may help the supposed victim resist – aggravating
Intent to kill anyone – aggravating
Intent to kill anyone from a class – aggravating
Craft, Fraud, Disguise
That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
Basis: to the means employed in the commission of the crime.
Kapag niloko mo or nagpanggap ka ng hindi naman ikaw. SHeesh.
Craft
Involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the accused.
Key word: pretended, deceived, lure, trickery
It is not aggravating if it is an element of the offense.
Fraud
Insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner which would enable the offender to carry out his design.
Disguise
Resorting to any device to conceal identity.
Covering of face
Covering of face but the accused is still recognizable is not aggravating
Covering of face but it was eventually removed is still aggravating.
Taking advantage of superior strength
That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense.
To take advantage of superior strength means to use purposely excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked.
Examples of NO advantage of superior strength:
One who attacks and other with passion and opposition does not take advantage of his superior strength
When the fatal blow was struck at the time when the aggressor and his victim were engaged against each other as man to man
When the attack was made on the victim alternately
There is no abuse of superior strength when one acts as principal and the other as accomplices.
When there is an allegation of treachery, superior strength is absorbed.
NOTE: 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 stronger than the wife.
NOTE: Numerical superiority does not always mean abuse of superiority
Ex. 3 accused holding bolos v. unarmed victim – aggravating
3 accused holding bolos v. victim – not aggravating (kasi equal na sila)
Examples of advantage of superior strength:
Strong man against a child
Strong man against an old person
When a man attacks a woman with a weapon it constitutes the circumstance of abuse of that superiority with his sex and the weapon used in the act
NOTE: Abuse of superior strength depends on the age, edge size, and strengths of parties. There is the INEQUALITY OF FORCES between the victim and aggressor.
Accused took turns in stabbing the victim.
Illegal detention
By a band v. abuse of superior strength:
By a band
abuse of superior strength
At least four malefactors
No. of aggressors or whether they were armed does not matter. What matters is their relative physical might.
All of the four are armed
Means employed to weaken defense
Intoxicating the victim to weaken defense.
Crime against persons or property
Might be absorb by treachery
Treachery
That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
When the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
It is when the offended party was not given opportunity to make a defense.
Basis: As reference to the means and ways employed in the commission of the crime.
Rules regarding treachery:
Applicable only to crimes against the person
Means, methods, or need not insure accomplishment of crime
The mode of attack must be consciously adopted.
Treachery must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.
Treachery absorbs evident premeditation, superior strength, aid of armed men, by a band, nighttime craft, and means to weaken the defense.
Age and sex is not included in treachery.
Passion and obfuscation cannot co-exist with treachery.
When it does NOT constitute treachery:
The mere statement that the attack was sudden does not immediately constitute treachery so long as the decision was accidental.
If the decision to kill was sudden, there is no treachery.
There must be evidence showing the accused reflected on the means, methods, and forms of killing the victim— the method must be deliberately chosen.
When the meeting between the accused and the victim is CASUAL and the attack impulsively done, there is no treachery.
There is no treachery when the victim was already defending himself when he was attacked by the accused.
The element of surprise alone is not sufficient. There should be means which tends directly and specially to insure the execution of the offense, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
Distinguished if the attack was a sufficient sudden and unexpected attack v. only done on impulse.
When the accused gave the deceased a chance to prepare.
When the attack was preceded by a warning.
Ex. “What did you say?”
Note however that calling the attention of the victim is not necessarily a warning.
Shooting was preceded by heated discussion.
Attack from behind is not always treachery if there is no positive proof
When there is treachery:
In killing a child
In poisoning
In praeter intentionem, aberratio ictus, error in personae
Even if the attack was face to face (so long as it was not preceded by a dispute and the offended party was unable to prepare himself for his defense.)
Flashing the beam of a flashlight on the face of victim
If it can be established that there was conspiracy and there was an agreement with the way of doing the offense, treachery is applicable to ALL conspirators.
Except: when the inductor did not give a specific instruction on how to commit the crime.
Rules in the commission of treachery:
When the aggression is continuous, treachery must be present at the beginning of the assault.
When the assault was not continuous, in that there was an interruption, it is sufficient that treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow was given.
Requisites of treachery:
the employment of means of execution that gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, and
the means of execution was deliberately or consciously adopted.
Ignominy
That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
Basis: to the means employed.
Ignominy is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which adds disgrace and obloquy to the injury caused by the crime.
This is applicable to crimes against chastity, less serious physical injuries, light or grave coercion, and murder.
It makes the effect of the crime more humiliating or to put the offended party to shame.
The victim must be alive– The offense is committed in a manner that tends to make its effect more humiliating to the victim that it adds moral suffering.
Rape as ignominy in robbery with homicide.
Unlawful entry
That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
Basis: the means and ways employed to commit the crime.
There is unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose.
Unlawful entry must be a means to effect entrance and not for escape.
Rationale: There is disrespect to the walls erected by means to guard their property and provide for their personal safety, shows a greater perversity, greater audacity.
The window is not intended for entrance into a building.
Dwelling and unlawful entry can co-exist.
Unlawful entry is not aggravating in trespass dwelling.
Breaking of wall, roof, floor, etc.
There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
The basis has reference to means and ways employed to commit the crime.
Forcible entry is aggravating
What aggravates the liability of the offender is the breaking of a part of the building as a means to the commission of the crime.
It will be considered for the ENTRANCE only and not for the escape.
This is inherent in the crime against robbery with force upon things.
EXCP: An officer acting in fulfillment of duty to arrest a person.
It is not to be appreciated where the accused did not break the door of the victim as a means to commit a crime.
Aid of minor and use of motor vehicle
That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).
(1) Taking advantage of minors for their irresponsibility and (2) to counteract the great facilities found by modern criminals in said means to commit crime and flee and abscond once the same is committed.
The use of motorcycles must be used as a means to commit the crime and to facilitate escape. It cannot be considered if the use of motorcycles is merely INCIDENTAL to the commission of the crime.
It is aggravating in the crime of forcible abduction.
“Or other similar means” – motorized vehicles or other efficient means of transportation similar to automobiles and airplanes.
A bicycle is NOT counted.
Cruelty
That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions.
It is when the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing him unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal act.
It is essential that the wrong done was intended to prolong the suffering of the victim, causing him unnecessary moral and physical pain.
Requisites of cruelty:
That the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong
That the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender.
There must be deliberate intention to prolong the suffering of the victim.
Cruelty cannot be presumed, it must be proven.
The plurality of wounds does not show cruelty. Cruelty cannot be presumed.
There is no cruelty when the other wrong was done after the victim was dead.
Ignominy v. cruelty
Ignominy–moral suffering
Cruelty–physical suffering
Alternative Circumstances
That can either be a mitigating or aggravating circumstances depending on the situation
3 Alternative Circumstances:
Relationship
Crimes against property- generally, it is mitigating
Crimes against persons- generally, it is aggravating
If it is a crime of light or less grave, it is mitigating
Intoxication
If it is habitual, it is aggravating
If you planned the crime and drink, it is aggravating
If there is no plan, it is mitigating
Degree of Instruction and Education
This is possible for estafa or theft, it can be mitigating
Against property,
Absolutory Clause
Are those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.
Although there is a crime, the offender is not criminally liable because there is no penalty provided by law. Because of public policy and public sentiments
Examples of Absolutory Cause:
Spontaneous desistance (Art. 6.)
Only applicable for attempted felonies.
Before any crime has been actually committed the perpetrator did not proceed with his crime.
Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability by reason of relationship (Art. 20)
If the accessory is a relative of the principal, the principal is liable for the crime he committed but the accessory cannot be liable.
EXCEPT:
If the accessory who has benefitted or profited is CRIMINALLY LIABLE.
Fencing- the act of buying, selling, or profiting from the crime.
PD 1829– law of obstruction of justice.
Example: X killed Y, After killing Y, X requested his son B to help him bury the cadaver of Y. B is not liable as accessory to the crime of homicide because B is the son of Principal X.
Legal spouse or parent who inflicts slight physical injuries under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)
2 instances: LEgal spouse or parents who inflicted less serious of physical injuries on his/her spouse of their daughters living with them, who they surprised in the act of sexual intercourse with another. He or she has no criminal liability for there is no penalty provided by law.
Destierro is given to the offender if death or physical injury was the result of the assault under Art. 247
Person exempt from criminal liability for theft, swindling, and malicious mischief by relationship to the offended party.
3 crimes covered here: (MET)
Malicious mischief
Estafa
Theft
Robbery IS NOT included but it can be a mitigating circumstance
Instigation
When a person induces they would be accused of committing the crime hence, he becomes a co-principal which would result in the acquittal of the accused.
Entrapment - refers to the ways and means resorted to for the capture of a lawbreaker in the execution of his criminal plan. A buy-bust operation conducted in connection with illegal activities such as drug related offenses is a form of an entrapment. This is not a bar to the prosecution and conviction of the law breaker.
Exemption under Trespass to dwelling under Art. 280:
For purposes of preventing serious harm to oneself, the occupants or a third person;
For purposes of rendering some service to humanity or justice;
Enter cafes, tavern, inns, and other public houses while the same are open.
Accessories who are exempted to light felonies (Art. 16)
Attempted and Frustrated light felonies, EXCEPT in crimes against person and crimes against property.
Comments
Post a Comment