Crim 1 - July 27, 2017 So meaning, the determination of mental condition, like

schizophrenia, bipolar, your insanity affects your daily

Circumstances that affect criminal liability: Justifying, life. You cannot function as a normal individual.
exempting, mitigating, aggravating, alternative (dementia praecox or schizophrenia).
circumstances. The person has no known control of his acts.

Either provide lighter or graver penalty, or will absolve In case of doubt as to the mental capacity of the
criminal liability (in the case of justifying circumstance) accused, the doubt is to be resolved in favor of sanity.
Legal basis: Art. 800 (1) of the Civil code. It is for the
Article 12 - Exempting Circumstances accused to prove the defense of insanity by quantum of
evidence. Clear and convincing evidence.
The concept of exempting circumstances:
The court has the duty to presume that you are sane.
 There is a crime but there is no criminal liability, (Tests, see Reviewer)
why? Because it is an exempting circumstance,
we are dealing with exemption to criminal In the Philippines, there is no definite criteria of insanity.
liability. (People vs Niancao)
 The perpetrator is being exempt by the law.
At the time you committed the crime, dapat insane ka,
There is a need for existence of criminal liability dapat expert witness ka (re. epileptic attack not harmful)
because we need to establish the basis of civil liability.
SOMNUMBULISM (sleepwalking)
Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code: “Every person There is lack of intelligence. He is deprived of will.
criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable” Insanity should be conclusively proved.
Walay buang na kabalo mu rape 😂
Kasi kung walang criminal liability, we are actually
dealing with justifying circumstance. There is absolute Cognition and Volition test (determining insanity)
pag erase sa crime, at the same time, the criminal 1) Test of cognition – complete deprivation of the
liability. mind during the crime.

The basis of art. 12 is lack of voluntariness. Acts are not Walay cognitive functions ang utok during the
voluntary. There are factors in voluntariness that are not commission of the crime. (walay intelligence)
met.
2) Test of Volition – total deprivation of freedom of
In intentional felonies, dili jud na mawala ang intention. will. (walay freedom)
Its either freedom or intelligence ang mawala. In case of
culpable felonies, pwede mawala ang negligence, pero In PH, both the cognition and volition test are applied.
dili siya exempting circumstance.. Culma maxim injuria There must be complete deprivation of will or freedom.
(inaudible). Kung hunahunaon nimo, dili lang kani ang exempting.
For example, irresistible force or uncontrollable fear.
Justifying vs exempting circumstance, as to nature, as
to effect: *inaudible* occurrence of insanity

Types of exempting circumstance:  At the time of the commission of the crime: art
12 of the RPC, you are exempt from the effects
1) Insanity and imbecility of the acts
 during the arraignment: suspension. The court
IMBECILITY- even if a person is of advanced age, you will order the suspension of the arraignment.
have a mental development comparable to that of a 2-7 ( sec. 11 rule 116, Rules of Court)
years old child.  during the trial: sec 3(f) rule 119, relation to
section 4.
INSANITY- there is complete deprivation of intelligence.  after judgment or while serving the sentence:
suspended. Take note, under article 29 of the
What is the presumption in the evidence of insanity? RPC, charge of penalties,
Article 800 (1) of the Civil Code: “The law presumes that
every person is of sound mind, in the absence of proof Example, if your sentence is 8 years. You spent 2 years
to the contrary”. (Law of general application) serving your sentence, then after that nabuang ka. You
were sent to the hospital and stayed there for 8 years,
Ang bata, kay deprived man siya of intelligence, buang dili naka ibalik sa correction.
ba siya? Dili. In our jurisdiction, the treatment of insanity
is always absolute. Walay level of or degree of insanity. MINORITY AS AN EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE.
In case of paedophiles, the can work regularly in the day. RA 9344: Juvenile Justice Act of 2006
Pero pag gabii, na maligno na sila. Dili na sila buang.
Why considered no crime ang bata? Lack of intelligence
Sa atoa, the determination of insanity is always that or discernment. Wala sila kabalo unsay tama or mali.
absolute. Kanang buang jud.
The minimum age of responsibility is 15. court shall either decide on the sentence or extend the
intervention. Minority ladies and gentlemen is a
Kung walay discernment, exempted siya. Unsay conditional exemption. Pagka exempt ka because of
buhaton sa iya? Intervention. Unsay buhaton sa your minority, may conditions yan.
intervention? If after the intervention, naka commit
gihapon ug offense ang bata, meaning walay epekto Unsa? Dapat sundin mo ang parents mo, etc… para
ang intervention. Unsay epekto ana? Dalahon siya sa mapaayo ang bata.
court to determine kung mag intervention ta balik or I
sentence na siya. (with respect sa crime na na commit) Kung after sa intervention wala gihapon nag bag o ang
bata, naa gihapon tendency to commit a crime, unsa
Who is a Neglected Child? ingon sa law gani? Return to the court. That language
Neglected Child vs CICL. class, dili ban a siya determination of discernment?
Unsay gina pa sabaot ana? Basaha gud ninyo sa RA
Neglected: The child is 12 years of age, up to 15, who 9344, (the return to the court), nay may dira sa kuna,
commits the following particular crimes: MAY decide. Kung gi decide sa supreme court na you
are really a bad child, a son of the evil, what is the
(Kung dili ni na commit sa bata within that particular age conclusion there? THERE IS THE DETERMINATION
bracket, dili siya matawag na naglected child) OF DISCERNMENT.

Age element THAT IS WHAT WE CALL DISCRETIONARY

DETERMINATION OF DISCERNMENT. Kay dili pa siya
*Parricide automatic.
*Murder
*Infanticide Unlike sa 15 years old and 1 day, automatic,
*Kidnapping discernment will be determined. Unsa I lihis nato siya o
*Serious illegal detention mag diversion ta? Intervention or diversion? Ana ang
*Robbery with Homicide question. Kasi kung may discernment then basically
*Rape DIVERSION. That is the difference between 15 years
*Destructive arson old on the spot and 15 years old and 1 day up to below
*Prohibited drugs. Kung himoon nimo na peddler ang 18 (imagine tong drawing ni sir sa board),
bata, neglected na siya. MANDATORY DETERMINATION OF DISCERNEMNT.
Pag walang discernment, automatic intervention tayo.
Sec 4 paragraph (8) ? of RA 9344 Study ni please We will reform the child. Pag may discernment,
diversion. Klaro na ta?
Child in Conflict with the Law – (see definition in RA
9344) So we go now to evidences which can prove minority
-birth certificate, baptismal records, school records,
Discernment testimony sa relatives, sa imong mama, sa imo sa child.
But take note, testimonies alone cannot be taken by the
court. Except in cases of rape… sole testimony of the
Criminal Law 1 child will not be taken by the court.
July 31 lecture
(Ad: kung wala na ingon during the course of
Minimum age of responsibility, 15. Automatic exempted. proceeding na insane ang tao then execution of
judgment na, dili I suspend ang execution, but re-open
DETERMINATION OF DISCERNMENT the trial – to avoid miscarriage of justice) section 24 rule
Minimum age of responsibility under RA9344 is 15years 119
old sarado. There is no mention in the law that 15 years
old discernment will be determined. 15 years old and
below automatic exempted you will be going to do
intervention, its either you will be released to the parents Burden of proving minority
or you will be admitted inside bahay pag-asa. Who has the obligation to prove minority, in court? The
defendant. Because you are claiming for the exemption
(naghimo na siyag drawing diri) of the law. (the same in justifying circumstances and
mitigating) but not in aggravating, why? Because
Example, so nag commit kag violation, exactly 15 years criminal laws must be interpreted in favour of the
old ka, sa birthday party nimo nag maoy ka naa ky accused. Why, what is the effect of aggravating
napatay. SO nay criminal action. You all know unsay circumstances? Mag bug at ang penalty.
mahitabo… intervention, tama? Why? In my example,
walay discernment diba automatic. So intervention… Read (Sierra vs People)

After ng intervention class, withn the period of 15 years Motive vs intent vs discernment – capable of
of age, wala gihapon nag bag o ang bata. Unsa gani determining consequences, knowledge?
tong gi ingon sa law? If after the intervention, there is no
reform, the minor shall be returned to the court for the Advert: (People vs Jacinto) choosing the place to
promulgation of the decision against the minor and the commit the crime can be established as discernment.
Kung minor pa siya then nag commit siyag crime but dili exempting circumstance, performance of an act with
pa in force ang juvenile justice act? Under art 4, there is due care. Without intention of causing it.
no retroactivity of laws. But there are certain exemptions.
In the example, the juvenile justice act will be given (People vs Fallorina): Elements. Take note this could
retroactive effect BECAUSE IT IS FAVORABLE TO have been a justifying circumstance.
THE ACCUSED.
Cases: (US vs Tanedo): nangaso siyag manok, ang
(Jose vs People): what principle is correlated there by bala nag ricochet sa tao na naigo, namatay.. unsay
the supreme court? Conspiracy to commit felonious exemption? Accident. Ma exempt siya o dili? Exempted
acts, tapos unsa, minority, discernment. So ang mga
minors nag commit ug particular act,tapos conspiracy What if loose firearm or unlicensed firearm? Dili na siya
could be established automatic, discernment could be musulod sa next element. Ngano? Illegal mana. Unsay
established. Bakit? Mahirap mag conspire sa mga bata. kalahian sa loose firearm ug unlicensed firearm?
Mag conspire na sila para mangawat ug bayabas, pero
dili mag conspire para manglugos.. automatic if Ang loose firearm RA10591 – ikaw nagadala pero dili
conspiracy will be established then conspiracy ang na ikaw ang tag iya. Dili sa imo nakapangalan ang baril
commit, patay kang bata ka. Us vs tanedo vs people vs nocum – baril niya sa baba
sa floor. Nag ricochet. Nay carelessness sa part ni
They were 15, 14, 12 tapos 11. They executed na nocum. Accident- defense by nocum. Walay due care
mangloob ug tindahan ug patayon ang tag iya. They didto kay sa baba niya gi baril. So dili na master ang
were apprehended. Unsay epekto ana? What will be the exempting circumstance.
proper course of action sa korte? Exempt sila.
Intervention lang sa.. Nay justifying, exempting, mitigating, aggravating,
pwede ba? Kamo na bahala diskarte ana
Karon gi commit nila usab, 16 na karon tong isa. 15 na Again kung dili mo sigurado always go back to the
si 14, 13 na si 12, ug 12 na si 11. Unsay mahitabo sa elements.
ilaha? Separate the 16, mandatory determination of
discernment. Doon sa iba, unsay mahitabo sa ila? PERSON WHO ACTS UNDER COMPULSION OF
Discretionary determination of discernment. IRRESISTABLE FORCE
BASAHA ANG MGA KASO T.T
ELEMENTS:
Kung naa na tay exempting circumstance pwede pa ba
ma appreciate ang mitigating circumstance? Think of 1) Acted in compulsion by means of PHYSICAL
any particular way, unsa? Of course conspiracy. May FORCE. Gihadlok gyud ka ba.
conspirators.. pwede ma appreciate ang mitigating 2) Physical force must be irresistible. Meaning dili
circumstance sa uban na dili apil sa exempting ka kabuhi.
circumstance. ANA 3) Physical force must come from the third person.
Unsa meaning aning third person? Meaning
Determination of discernment: evident premeditation. In actual person siya. Existing third person. In this
the commission of the crime, there is evident particular instance ang victim ikaw ug siya. Dili
premeditation, basically, nay conspiracy, discernment kay pag-iisip mo lang, dili kay pagtuo lag nimo.
could be established. BUT TAKE NOT WHEN AND
WHERE TO APPLY THIS. (People vs Moreno): explanation of third person – actual
physical person. Naa jud mismo sa imo atubangan. Diri
(People vs Alcabao): nagmura yung bata dito. Sabi niya sa Moreno, gi befriend niya ang mga Japanese
king ina mo. Diri nasakpan ang bata na nangawat ug authorities para makalaya siya, and later on, gi establish
mangga. The remarks made by the child establishes sila as their men. Isa siya ka captain sa isa ka grupo.
discernment. Now may engwentro sa Japanese men vs Filipino
guerrillas ba. And one of the alleged perpetrators is
(Llave vs People): bright boy too much intelligence + Paciano Delos Santos. Japanese commanders nagsulti
crime = discernment can be established. Of course take na dakpon si Delos Santos, nag follow sa order si
note of the age of the child. Moreno. Gi dakop si Delos Santos.

ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR WITHOUT Gi pugutan niyag ulo si Delos Santos. Gi prosecute siya
INTENTION TO CAUSE HARM sa relatives ni Delos Santos. Dakpan si Moreno and was
Take note that we’ve mentioned in the exempting charged with homicide. Ang rason ni Moreno kay wala
circumstances, there is civil liability. Because it affects daw siyay mabuhat kay gi hadlok daw siya sa mga
the actor una. Meaning, although the actor is exempted, Japanese na kung dili niya buhaton, commander will kill
ang effects ay hindi kinakalimutan ng batas. May effect me. There is a threat on my life. Ang ingon sa Supreme
talaga. In the particular circumstance, this is the Court, no. gi isa2 ang elements. Third person, unsa ang
exemption. PARAGRAPH 4. Unsa ni siya, accident. third person dira, naa jud na tao.

So what is the reason there nganong walay civil liability. (People vs Baldogo): Palawan penal colony – nay duha
Because of the concept na naay injury pero walay prison si Baldogo ug Bermas. Gi kuha ni sila na mag
liability, why? because wala siya gi tuyo. Why because trabaho sa balay. Gi patay ang lalaki na anak ni
if we will look at the elements of accident as an Camacho tapos ang babae gi kidnap. Later on na
apprehend ug gi kasuhan siya. Ang theory of defense Ex: patya na si atty dalam kay gi bagsak ko ana. Kung
niya unsa? Gi hadlok man gud ko ni Bermas, kung dili dili nimo siya patyon putlan taka ug kamot. Unsay mas
nako patyon to si junior, akoy patyon ni Bermas. Iya greater maputlan or magpatay?
defense is irresistible force. Take note ni ana ang
supreme court you have so many chances na INSUPERABLE CAUSES
makatakas. Pwedi nimo sila biyaan tapos isumbong Because of some extremities or exigencies, wala nimo
nimo sa pulis. Take not kung dalahon nimo sa bukid nabuhat. You are exempted by law.
mag baktas2 pa mo ana. But you never did. Therefore,
the force there, if any, is not irresistible. So wala. It is some motive which has morally or lawfully or
physically prevented a person to do what the law
(Manansala case): nay boss sa isa ka company, si provides. Render ny act difficult. Not necessary na
Kathleen Siy. Gi sugo niya si Marissa Bautista na mag accident. It is enough na ma endanger nimo ang isa ka
withdraw from her personal account. pero pag dating sa act commanded to you by law kung dili nimo siya i
bangko, offline man. Unsa iya gibuhat? Nag adto siya consider.
sa petty cash custodian. Manghiram daw ug 38
thousand tapos later pag pwede na mag withdraw sa Elements
account we will pay it. Ni ana si Bautista. Ang problema
pagkuha niya ug kwarta ug paghatag niya kay Siy, wala ABSOLUTORY CAUSES
niya na ingon na “mam gikan ni siya kay Manansala. Dili
ni gikan sa metrobank, gikan ni kay Manansala”. Later What are absolutory causes?
on during inventory nila nadakpan na nay kulang na 38 - there is a crime committed but for reasons of
thousand. Na discover ni Siy. public policy and sentiment, there is no crime
committed (Abeto, 2017)
Na remember ni Bautista. Ang problema si Lacanilao - particular circumstances or considerations that
wala nila gi amend na nakabayad na diay. Gi tuyo nila are not found in the RPC but in certain
na dili I amend tung kuan records sa inventory. instances no, it will either exempt or justify the
Therefore, napasama ni siy. Gi order ni Lacanilao na dili act.
siya I amend. Gi sumbong nila sa President. Unsay
nahitabo? Tanggal sa trabaho si Kathleen Siy kay But it will not mitigate criminal liability.
nangorrupt lagi siya. Because of that na discover diay Now we can mention several absolutory causes. It can
niya na si Lacanilao ang nagsugo. WHAT IS THE be found in the RPC
RESULT THERE? NAG FILE UG FALSIFICATION OF
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS. 1) Spontaneous desistance in the attempted stage
of a felony. That is an absolutory cause. It is not
Pag kaso ni ana si Manansala na walay koy mabuhat justifying or exempting, and not mitigating. You
dira kay gisugo lang man ko sa akong boss kay are absolved from criminal liability.
mahadlok ko sa repercussion sa akong boss. Ana ang
supreme court no, walay irresistible force diri. Wala siya How about independent will in a frustrated
gi hadlok ni Lacanilao. There was no mention in the stage? We have already discussed that you will
case of a particular repercussion. be liable for something else

UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR OR COMPULSION 2) Article 7 – light felonies not constituting crimes

Irresistible force vs uncontrollable fear. against persons and property. Again the
important consideration is here is being
In irresistible force, the offender uses violence, or particular with crimes against persons and
physical force to compel another person to commit a property. Ayaw ninyo kalimti because it can be
crime. The injury caused is greater than or equal to the asked in the examination.
injury the accused caused.
3) We have also this concept instigation – you
Ex: “patya na si carla abellana. Kung dili nimo na patyon compel an individual to adapt a particular
patyon nako imo asawa” behaviour to adapt a particular course of action.

In uncontrollable fear, the offender uses threat or 4) Marriage of an offended party in cases of
intimidation to compel another to commit. Maybe seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness
generated through a threatened act directly from the and rape – these are called private crimes
third person. Not necessarily nay tao. So exemption because under normal circumstances these
siya sa 3rd actor rule sa irresistible force. Pwede na wala crimes are committed sa mga pribadong lugar.
siya dira. Pwede mu ingon siya na “kauban nako imo
asawa diri, patyon nako imo asawa kung dili nimo rape- 5) Article 20 – accessories who are exempt from
on si Carla abellana on facebook live”. Basta ang criminal liability by reason of relationship. Unsa
panghadlok si generated towards the accused ni sila? Accessories. Except if (see syllabus)
INJURY CAUSED MAY BE A LESSER DEGREE THAT
THE ACCUSED CAUSED 6) In cases of adultery and concubinage – if the
offended party shall have consented or pardon.
Consent gihatag before the commission of the
crime. Pag pardon after the commission of the
 crime. (Art 344 of the RPC – crimes mentioned SENILITY (OVER 70)
are private crimes) Ordinarily, ang senility is ordinary mitigating
circumstance na siya. Pero nay exemption.
7) Trespass to dwelling art 280 of RPC – generally
you are not allowed to enter a property without Dili mag apply ang art 49, qualified by the relationship
the express consent of the owner. Because of of the offender and the offended party.
certain exigencies, you have to enter the
property. Gusto nimo patyon ang isa ka tao, imo napatay imong
anak, 70 years old ka, unsay epekto ana, parricide. Pag
ENTRAPMENT VS. INSTIGATION adto sa korte pwede ba ka muingon na mitigating
circumstance of old age? Dili na pwede. Because art 49
Entrapment- buy-bust operation, the criminal is a special rule on penalty. Walay mention na pwede
design is from the offender mitigating circumstance.

Instigation – criminal intent originated sa nagsugo. Special aggravating or privileged mitigating, depende
That makes it illegal. Gina tease nimo siya to sa effect.
commit a violation of the law.
MINORITY
ART 13 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES RA 9344 - relate sa art 68 – penalty to be imposed on
- concept of mitigating circumstances – gina offenders under 18 years of age, minor
reduce niya ang penalty Stop, article 80 – suspension of sentence of minor
delinquents. Pero gi amend na siya sa sec 38 of RA
Rule in mitigating circumstances – dapat nag arrive 9344 crash out 68 and 80.
from a single fact or source.
Sec 38 of RA 9344 – automatic suspension of sentence.
ORDINARY OR PRIVILEGED MITIGATING SUSPENDED SENTENCE without need of application.
CIRCUMSTANCES Kailan mag apply? Read section 23 of RA 9344. Pag 15
years old and up and nay determination of discernment,
1) Look codal unsa next na move, (sec 20, intervention).

Important terms: After, tanawon ang imposable penalty sa crime

- Preceding chapter. Unsa ang covered sa committed. Kung 6 years and nay private offended party,
preceding chapter? Articles 11 and 12. nay particular form of diversion. Kinsa mag buhat ana?
Justifying and exempting circumstances. Law enforcement officer ug punong barangay. Kung 6
Unsa iyang gi ingon years na walay private offended party, (illegal gambling,
- when all the elements has not been met. drugs), kinsa mag direct? Social worker. Karon kung
That’s why I am requiring you to memorize higher than 6 years ang imposable penalty unsay
the elements para kabalo mo when to apply mahitabo, suspended sentence. (Pero agi muna sa
the first paragraph of article 13. section 23. Automatic na nay discernment na kay
- Relate to art 69 – yawyaw article 69 offender naman ang tawag sa imoha. ) ngano
suspended sentence man? Kay usually kung lapas sa 6
Important words: (basi mag pa quiz siya sa computation years, heinous crime na siya. Hantod asa hulaton,
sa penalty) gipatay niya 17 siya, hantod mag abot siyag 18, para
full criminal liability. Didto na siya mabilanggo. Provided
- 1 or 2 degrees that the suspended sentence shall be supplied. Unsay
- pag unlawful aggression lang 1 degree rule gina ingon, predating of the sentence. So kung 8
lower lang years imo penalty, 17 ka maghulat kag 1 year para full
criminal responsibility, 1 year imo gi gamit diri na
Diba ana majority of the elements. Pag majority, suspended sentence. Applying the rule, 7 years nalang
unlawful aggression pero wala ang isa, duha lang, 2 imong bunuon.
degrees.
Sa intervention walay tay problema. Automatic, 15
Example ang penalty is maximum sa prision correcional years and below, intervention dayon na. Apil ba diri ang
iya medium kay arresto mayor and minimum is arresto 15 years old and below? Dili. DSWD na na dira.
menor.
NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG
Unlawful aggression is what, a condition sine qua non. THAN THAT COMMITTED.
Ngano man dako ang tanaw sa law sa unlawful !Praetor intentionem!
aggression? Kay nag cause siya ug imminent danger sa There is lesser perversity on your part
imong kinabuhi. Bahalag di nimo makuha tanan Cases
elements, basta you are entitled to defend yourself. Pag Nay identification na dili kadto ang intention. Notable
ikaw ang nag cause ug unlawful aggression unsa, and evident misproportion between the means
incomplete self-defense. employed in the criminal act and the result. Can this
apply to culpable felonies? No.
Applicable ang paragraph 1, 2 and 3 sa article 11 basta From the word itself: intentionem
1 element plus unlawful aggression. 2 degrees lower. Why? Article 4 (1) delito
(Ppl vs ural): naay ginakulata na prisoner tapos gi There is no clear and succinct explanation on this
bubuan ug gasoline, tapos gi sindihan tapos nasunug. particular matter. Privileged mitigating circumstance
Intentionem: walay man to gi intend kay hubog siya ato diba 68 69 64.
na time. Lol (dili man siya habitual drunkard) Article 68 has already been amended by section 38 RA
9344 in relation to sec 23 in relation to sec 20 in relation
(Ppl vs pahinado (?): belief of the accused is not to section 41. Article on death penalty has been
entertained in court suspended. Art 47

Not appreciated in aberration ictus. Why? From the Can this prevail over article 48 and article 49? No
word praetor sa aberratio ictus isa lang imo victim but it privileged mitigating circumstance cannot offset these.
so happens na duha imo na igo. Per same crime lang (special aggravating circumstances)
man. So natural tendency ana unsa? Wala kay
kaikyasan ana. ARTICLE 12 PARAGRAPH 4

ACCIDENT
August 7 lecture
There are certain elements there:
Article 12 paragraph 4 in relation to paragraph 1 article - performs a lawful act
13. - with due care
Article 67 paragraph 4 - without fault
- causes injury or damage
Article 64 paragraph 5
Divisible penalties. Example prision correcional: max What will be the effect if there is no injury or no damage?
med min ROC, cause of action elements: (exercise of a right to
sue)
So, understanding article 64 would give you an insight Cause of action is an act which constitutes a violation of
on how to apply rules on penalties. your right
What is the rule? - existence of a right
- Obligation to respect the right
Paragraph 1, if there is no aggravating circumstance, - violation of the right
mag medium ta diba. Tama? - injury and damage on the part of the victim.
(major)
If nay mitigating mubaba ta. If nay generic aggravating
circumstance mutaas ta. So what if paragraph 5, there’s THERE WILL BE NO CAUSE OF ACTION!! –no liability-
a special instance there. What is that instance there? damnum absque injuria
2 or more mitigating circumstance. What will happen?
Meaning, example nay 3 ka mitigating then aggravating, In this particular instance, dapat naa jud ni siyay injury
zero, we will apply paragraph 5 what will happen? We for a criminal action to pursue.
will lower 1 degree. That could be our basis of
determining proper imposable penalty. Effect of the absence of the other 3 elements of accident
as exempting.
What will happen? So we go arresto mayor in its Art 67 – penalty to be imposed skemfet read nalang bes
maximum. But take note may dalawa, isa pa sobra.
What will be the effect? The excessive 1 will be Always remember art 67 and 69 in relation to par 1 of
considered ordinary mitigating circumstance. So the art 13, ma fail daw kung di ni ma keep in mind. Over.
proper penalty would be medium (without applying
indeterminate sentence law). You will start there. Katong dili mahulog sa 69 saluon sa art 67. Mahulog sa
69 mga exempting na walay elements.
Now what if may apat mitigating? What will be the
effect? Will you apply article 64 paragraph 5 twice? Insanity will not fall under par 1 of art 13. There is no
NO. why? Because it will be applied only once. The elements in insanity kasi absolute atong test of insanity.
remaining two will be the ordinary mitigating COMPLETENESS. Kung dili ka completely insane
circumstance, therefore you go down 2 degrees lang. kanag dili ka ma deprive of intelligence, you may fall
so from maximum, the proper penalty, if there are 2 under par 9 of article 13(illness) gets?
ordinary mitigating circumstance, therefore, the proper
penalty would be arresto mayor in its minimum. THAT ART 67 accident. Relating
IS THE CONCEPT.THAT IS ALL THAT YOU NEED. Tulo lang automatic pag walay injury walay kaso.
Automatic ba ni? NO. qualify na dapat. If mawala ang 1,
Now, paano kung may aggravating circumstance? you are not performing a lawful act, tapos kani, with
Dalawa ang aggravating lima ang mitigating. Same rule. intent, ibig sabihin with intent ang act. What is the effect,
Rule of offsetting. 5-2=3. Then apply article 64 paragrph the act performed is intentional felony. And it is with due
5 care, meaning evident premeditation. Art 67 will not
apply. Because art 67 is akin to art 365. It involves
NA RECORD DAI Q NIMO penalties related to negligent acts. What if ang element
is this, lawful act, pero without due care, then with fault,
tapos may injury that is when you apply art 67 depende
kung grave or less grave ang felony. Culpable felonies trigger ug kalain, kay gi provoke nimo siya.
– art 63. Dapat ba positive and imminent? No. that is
unlawful aggression. Pero pareho lang sila
Most of the time, if you apply this to culpable felonies, provocation.
mas mugamay ang penalty. Ma defeat ang penal - Any unjust or improper conduct capable of
purpose. exciting anyone, maka cause ug kalain.

Intention can be ascertained by identifying the weapon Requisites:

used and the injury inflicted.
There are certain instances where praetor intentionem Effect kung dili tanan present? Wala, there is no
cannot be appreciated by the court. Not applicable to mitigating circumstance. Unlike sa justifying ug
culpable felonies, murder qualified by treachery. exempting. KUNG KULANG ANG ELEMENTS SA
MITIGATING, AUTOMATIC, WALAY MITIGATING. NO
(Ppl vs Pajenado): Ambush = treachery. You cannot SUCH THING AS INCOMPLETE MITIGATING
appreciate this particular mitigating circumstance. The CIRCUMSTANCE.
purpose of treachery will be defeated.
 Provocation must be sufficient, meaning
- Not appreciated in cases where there is no adequate. How to determine? Nay certain
material harm. Why? there is no excessive categories.
effect. - the act constituted provocation
- Applicable only to physical injuries and material - social standing of the person provoked (ppl
harm. vs ampar)
- Not available as a defense in anti-hazing law. - place and time where the provocation is
Why? The law stated it should not be applicable made
- Abberatio ictus, the intended crime to
perpetrate, the result, there is no particular  Provocation must be personal and directed to
difference. Avoid rendering article 48 useless. the accused (target based ni siya)
- Error in personae, same reason in abberatio  Provocation must immediately precede the act
ictus (reason: diminution of free will)

(Ppl vs Boyles): Very important case…………. DIFFERENTIATION IN ART 11 AND 13

Absence of Provocation on the part of the person
Intent during the commission of the felony, not during defending himself or his relative
the trial stage, mitigating circumstances could not be Presence on the part of the offended party
appreciated, the established facts in the case has the IN BOTH, PROVOCATION SHALL BE SUFFICIENT.
intention to commit the particular act. That is the
presumption of the law.
August 9 2017 lecture
(People vs Centeno)
VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
(Ppl vs Flores)
NAGHIGANTI – revenge, kasi lahi2 ang gamit nila with
(People vs Cristobal): unintentional abortion (read) the provocation and passion and obfuscation, pero
pareho lang pero lahi ang pagka gamit.
(Ppl vs Lameno)
EX: TIME in relation to provocation? Vindication?
(Cimafranca vs Sandiganbayan): malversation of public Nanimalos ka, retaliation. At the outset what is the
funds. Mala prohibita. Intent is immaterial. meaning of this? Is that allowed? NO.
Misappropriated because he was impelled by the In retaliation, wala nay self defense dira because the
genuine love for his family. Pero 8,000 nalang ang wala aggression has already ceased to exist. Generally it is
pa nabayran, in less than one month. No intention to not allowed. Even if you allow as a mitigating, dili
commit so grave a wrong. Praetor intentionem can be gihapon ka ma exempt. That’s why mitigating
appreciated. COMMENT NI SIR: MALVERSATION IS circumstance lang. there is certain consideration why
MALA PROHIBITA, THEREFORE INTENTION IS medyo mababa ang penalty.
IMMATERIAL. IF YOU COMMITED A VIOLATION OF
THE LAW, YOU COMMITED A VIOLATION. BUT, the Requisites:
mitigating circumstance in paragraph 10, analogous  that there be a grave offense done to the one
circumstances. Gibalik niya ang kwarta. The proper committing the felony, to his spouse,
applicable provision is paragraph 10 article 13. This is ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or
an aberration. adopted brothers and sisters or relatives within
the same degrees. Isa isahon nato medyo taas
PROVOCATION siya no..
- sufficient provocation. The same as that in 11
- enough to excite or intimate an individual to
commit a particular act. Tama siya na mag
First word to be considered: grave offense – pareha DISTINGUISH PROVOCATION AND VINDICATION
bani siya sa grave offense na gina refer nato sa art 9 in
relation to art 25 of the RPC? NO (PEOPLE vs Dagatan): ngano mali na target-based ang
vindication?
Unsa man ang pag define? Those which are gina
tagaan ug penalty na capital punishment. Technical def. (People vs Benito)
But here, unsay meaning sa grave offense diri. ANY
ACT THAT IS OFFENSIVE TO THE OFFENDER or his PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
relatives. Pwede man ni siya a lawful act but then again,
you will be held liable pero nay mitigation. PASSION – any particular act that would diminish your
power of reasoning. dili importante diri ang nabuhat
Example, the offender is exercising his right to defend a nimo na act, ang mental state ang importante sa
relative.. ingana. Pero majority sa elements sa defense perpetrator
of a relative kay wala na meet. But basically, gi establish
na nay gibuhat sa relative niya, nay nag trigger sa iya Requisites:
na magbuhat ato. So during the prosecution, pwede ba - there be an act both unlawful and sufficient to
siya justified? How about mitigating par 1? NO! kay wala produce such a condition of mind
niya na meet ang majority sa elements. Pero pwede
basa par 5? YES. VINDICATION. Retaliate na siya. Diff: grave offense- pwede lawful basta anything na
offensive. But in this case nay particular na act is na
Factors to determine gravity of the offense of vindication provoke ka and unlawful. Pwede ba mag apply diri ang
- social standing of the person – gi unsa pag mistake of fact doctrine?
gamit sa social standing of the person sa
provocation? KAMO NA BAHALA ANA. - that the said fact that produced the act is not far
- PLACE and time when the insult was made. removed from the act committed within a
Walay age didto. You will put age kung naga considerable length of time to release the
answer kag par 2 didto or par 10, analogous perpetrator to recover his equanimity
circumstances
- the act that causes obfuscation was committed
Pareho rana siya pero lahi lahi pagka gamit sa by the victim himself. Pareho sa par 4.
provocation and vindication. Pero walay age diri
CASES (People vs Guhiting)
(People vs Hicks): act must come from lawful
Naa bay time interval na required? Dapat ba mabilis ang sentiments
pag vindicate? Unsay gi allow na pinaka dugay? Accdg
to jurisprudence, the use of immediate here kay mali, (People vs Dela Cruz): naa siyay karapatan kay nay
dapat PROXIMATE. Dapat nay particular time interval connection sa ila duha
that would connect the particular crime sa grave offense
na committed sa imoha or sa relatives nimo. (People vs Rebucan): 4 days after the discovery that his
BASTA THE RATIONALE IS PWEDE PA MA wife was sexually abused. 4 days was enough for the
ESTABLISH WHY NA COMMIT ANG PARTICULAR accused to have recovered his equanimity. Passion
ACT. cannot be appreciated.
TAKE NOT SA VINDICATION, NAAY RELATIVES DIRI
NA NA APIL Unsay mga realizations nato diri;
- naay time element sa passion or obfuscation.
In provocation dapat ang perpetrator kay siya ang gi Sa provocation unsa ka dugay? Immediately.
provoke. On the other hand, sa vindication, it is allowed. Sa vindication – passion, musulod ba siya sa
10? Analogous circumstances. Sige lang later
Qualification of the relatives
- SPOUSE Can vindication be appreciated or paired with passion
- ASCENDANTS or obfuscation? “Dili because ang concept sa
- DESCENDANTS vindication is revenge or retaliation” (Alaan, 2017). We
- BASTA BROTHERS OR SISTERS are not allowed to retaliate.
- BY AFFINITY WITHIN THE SAME DEGREES
- kinsa gina mean diri? Relatives by affinity. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND CONFESSION OF
Kinsa ni sila? In-laws. Ang question diri kay gi GUILT
qualify sa words na within the same degrees. -duha diri ang mitigating circumstances, automatic
Asa ni siya? Pareho ban i sila sa concept of entitled ka to two. Privileged mitigating circumstance ni
relatives sa justifying? Dili. Limited siya. KINSA sya
NI SILA? Meaning I relate nato ang relatives by
affinity sa brothers and sisters. VOLUNTARY SURRENDER
1) That the offender had not been actually
How many degrees ang brothers and sisters nato sa arrested. Syempre. Because the state kung gi
atoa? 2nd degree. Basically kung layo na diha, you arrest na ka has custody of your person, there’s
cannot claim this. Obviously dili pud pwede provocation. no use sa pag surrender kung gi arrest na ka.
 2) That the offender surrendered himself to a VOLUNTARY CONFESSION
person of authority or to the latter’s agent.
Requisites
Question: kinsa maning persons in authority. 1) Spontaneously confessed his guilt – pwede ba
Answer: art 152 as amended by RA9178. Kinsa ang confession ma contain sa isa ka particular
ni sila? document? Sa pleading or counter affidavit
Person of authority: one who is vested with pero gi present siya court, that is open court.
jurisdiction or power to govern and execute the Dili lang siya verbal but contained in the
laws whether as an individual or as a member document, pwede ba siya?
of a tribunal court or governmental corporation.
Executive officials, mayors president, 2) Made in the competent court trying the case
government, judge Cross examination pero kung gi ingon niya na
Because of the amendment certain individuals ako nag pirma, dili bana voluntary?
were included – teachers are considered as
persons in authority. Kung nag commit kag 3) Made prior to the presentation of evidence by
crime ni surrender ka sa teacher, pwede ba ka the prosecutor
mu claim ani na mitigating circumstance? NO
the inclusion of teachers by the reason of sheer Example: Arrested, nag file kag bail bond sa quezon city
power of RA1978 kay in relation lang sa court, later on nag issue ug motion ang prosecution na
DIRECT ASSAULT. (Art 148.) ang police? magkuha ug deposition paper to get your testimony.
Chief of police? Ang korte nag i file-an ug bail bond, mao to ang nagkuha
ug deposition paper nimo. Tapos ni ingon ka na ikaw.
3) Surrender was voluntary, unconditional, and Kung I present na siya sa korte, can you claim the
spontaneous. mitigating of voluntary confession. Kay sa court sa
quezon city ni amin ko. Can that be allowed by the
What is meant, for voluntary surrender to be court? NO. because the court that is taking the
appreciated, the same must be spontaneous in such a deposition should be the court trying the case. Sila lang
manner that it shows the interest of the accused to nag allow sa bail bond, ang court sa quezon. Diri man
surrender unconditionally to the authority because he sa davao ang jurisdiction kay diri man gi commit ang
acknowledges his guilt or because he wishes the state crime. So diri ma file ang kaso.
to be saved from the trouble and expenses necessary
for his search and capture. (People vs Juan): humanag trial, ka present nag
evidence, pero wala pa nahuman, tapos bigla lang nag
Unconditional - example: pre-bargaining ka, sige mag confess ug guilt. So unsa mahitabo ana, humana ang
surrender ko pero ang I penalty sa ako for homicide lang. kaso because there is already confession. Guilt could
pwede na siya or dili? There are certain instances when be established na pero magpadayon gihapon na not to
voluntary surrender is not appreciated by the Supreme determine guilt but to determine kung nay mitigating or
Court: aggravating. Can mitigating circumstance of voluntary
confession be allowed? NO. because the requirement
 (Ppl vs Agacer): took notice of the crime of the law, elements niya prior to the presentation.
committed (killing) tapos nawala ang tao.
Automatic 2-3 days naa nay search warrant na If you confessed during preliminary investigation,
against you or arrest warrant. Surrender ka kay pwede ba? Open court ba ni siya? What if during
nahadlok lang ka, consideration, dili siya arraignment? Arraignment – pangutanahon ka before
voluntary. the formal trial final notice that you are being accused.
 The accused surrendered only after having For the last time na ikaw ba nagbuhat. Mao rana siya.
been informed of the charge of rape against him. Pwede? Basta prior to presentation of evidence
2 months from the commission of the crime.
The alleged surrender therefore cannot be Plea to a lesser offense; gi charge-an ka ug murder,
appreciated to a mitigating circumstance. tapos conditional plea of guilt, confession na siya dili?
Dugay na kaayo.. DILI. Dapat voluntary gane. Pero unsa imo gi ingon? “sir
 The accused went to the barangay chairman to homicide raman to kanang qualifying circumstance dira
seek protection against the retaliaton of the dili na tinood. Chance encounter nana siya treachery
relatives of his victim, and not to uplift his will not be appreciated. Claim nako homicide” tapos mu
participation in the said crime ingon ang prosecution that the plea of the accused will
 seeing that the police was already approaching not be (skems) we will proceed with the trial for murder.
and the accused did not resist, accused had no Then after sa trial convicted ka, ang na prove lang kay
choice but to go with them (na corner siya) homicide lang, can you be granted with the confession
INTRIGUING CASES (SEE REYES BOOK) (mitigating)? YES yes yes.

Example 10 days na wala gihapoy warrant because of (People vs Yturriaga): it is not the fault of the accused
misfeasance sa prosecutor, wala lang nalihok. Tapos ni that the prosecution erroneously presented the
surrender ka 14 days, voluntary ba gihapon siya? qualifying circumstance of treachery without adequate
Consult section 2 sa art 3? Bill of rights – consti evidence. Dili to niya sala.
Kung baliktad - ang charge sa imo kay murder pero nag August 14 lecture
plea kag homicide, tapos na prove na murder – NO
because at the outset, conditional to siya Classification of aggravating circumstances
Specific aggravating is distinct sa special aggravating
(Ppl vs waldasan): MTC na kaso, not guilty your honor, circumstances
nag proceed ang trial, pilde, tapos sa RTC, nag plead
ug guilty, pwede bani siya? Dili na. QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING
- mitigating circumstance is not applied in
PHYSICAL DEFECT violation of special laws. It covers rpc provisions
- offender is deaf, dumb, blind, or some physical EXN:
defect restricting his means of action on the - when the violation of SPL is mala in se – (BP
commission. 22, anti loose firearms laws, effects of bearing
firearm is dako ang effect) Naay crimes na my
Nay comment si Boado diri: the physical defect must be gamit ug penalty sa rpc pero dili siya mala in se
related to the offense committed. In other words, the
defect or illness must be a contributing factor to the - when the special penal law allows for mitigation
commission of the crime. – mala prohibita siya pero nay certain terms
provided in the provisions na pwede mu
Example putol imo left, imo right naa, kusgan, pero gi appreciate ug mitigating or aggravating
baril nimo siya. Serious physical injuries, contention,
physical defect: yes, or sumbag lang,. pero naa kay baril - even if mala in se na siya, dili pwede ang
lang, self-defense? No reasonable necessity of the mitigating.. art 63 of RPC: in cases in which the
means employed wala. Sumbag rato, baril imoha. law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it
Majority? Yes privileged mitigating. Pwede kaayo pud shall be applied by courts regardless of any
ang physical defect mitigating or aggravating circumstances that
may have attended the commission.
The physical defect would considerably make it difficult
for you to commit the crime. Ex: murder – of your act would fall under art248
of the RPC, maski nay mitigating that will not be
J. Regalado: if the accused is totally or completely blind considered, why because the penalty is single
and dumb, he does not prove that his means of action indivisible penalty. What is that penalty,
are thereby restricted. DUMB- LACKING THE POWER reclusion perpetua. Oras na ma qualify imong
OF HUMAN SPEECH act na murder, there are 21 aggravating
circumstance, automatic, cannot be
Does this mitigating circumstance distinguish an appreciated.
uneducated person? No.
Isa lang ang kailangan, because we need to
ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER – panghuna huna, kung qualify the act: treachery, all of the other
dili ka absolute buang, pwede ka diri. Ex: klepto, tapos aggravating, wala na.
nag shoplift ka, pwede ka dri. Pero definitely dili ka
exempted. Kay dili ka completely buang. QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
- change the nature of the crime of the offense of
DEFECT VS ILLNESS: the felony committed.

DEFECT – PHYSICAL; ILLNESS – MENTAL Kung na prove ang isa ka aggravating

circumstance (ex. Treachery), all other
Requisites: aggravating circumstances need not be proven
- that the illness diminishes the accused’s because the crime will be qualified to murder –
exercise of willpower
- such illness should not deprive the offender of BOADO: in case of qualifying circumstances ang rule
consciousness of his acts niya, pag nay multiple aggravating circumstance, ex,
murder, naay isa ka aggravating circumstance to qualify,
Illness of the mind not amounting to insanity the other will be generic aggravating circumstance.
THAT IS NOT ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. Why?
ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCE Because we’ve already mentioned, pag I qualify sa isa
- poverty pero kung recidivist, neh ka aggravating circumstance ang isa ka particular act,
- surrender of weapon ma change ang nature niya, automatically the other
(comafranca vs ppl) aggravating circumstance will no longer be appreciated
because we have art 63. –kasi in this instance, the
Offender based ba ang mitigating circumstance? penalty is an indivisible one, so mawala na siya.

NOW, naa bay instance na pwede ma apply ning gina

ingon ni boado? OF COURSE NAA. Pag ang penalty
prescribed for a crime is DIVISIBLE. This is now the
case where we will apply art 64.
Example, art 295 – robbery with a band, kung gi commit - his presence has not prevented the offender
nimo ang band duha ang aggravating, we will qualify it from doing the act (presence alone is sufficient,
to make it robbery with a band, ang isa, unsa nalang? di kailangan na may gawin ang PA)
Generic aggravating circumstance.
Art 64 kung walay aggravating or mitigating na BOADO: teachers are included in the term public
circumstance, we will provide the medium. authorities
ESTRADA: teachers are not public authorities
Entrapment can neither justify nor exempt nor mitigate REYES: dili included ang teachers
your criminal liability because it is a valid operation of DALAM: the contention of Estrada is more conclusive.
law, aberration ictus, The amendment made of art 152 by RA1972,
specifically provides the inclusion of teachers for
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE – factors that are if purposes of only applying art 148 – direct assault lang.
attendant or present in the commission of the crime will take note dili included ang teacher.
increase the penalty, except inherent and qualifying, (art
62 of RPC) *nag inom sila tapos gi bigyan niya iya katapd – during
trial, how will you appreciate intoxication?*
Classification of aggravating circumstances:
3) THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED IN
1) ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER DISREGARD OF RESPECT DUE TO THE
OF THE PUBLIC POSITION OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS
RANK, AGE, SEX, AND DWELLING OF THE
Art 62 1(a) – max regardless of any mitigating, -special OFFENDED PARTY I THE LATTER HAS NOT
aggravating ni. Why? Because may special rule na GIVEN PROVOCATION
provided sa iyaha.
Kung naa ni tanan upat, it will be considered as one
WHEN IS THIS CONSIDERED? aggravating circumstance…
Nag hold up ka tapos chief of staff ka dri sa davao, can Basis: greater perversion
this aggravating circumstance be appreciated? NO. the
law requires that you take advantage of the position. RANK- should be given its plain ordinary meaning to a
Meaning you must use this influence, prestige, and position
ascendancy.
(Ppl vs rodel): definition of rank - refers to a high social
(People vs mandolado): service firearm of military position or standing, armed forces, army, navy, in
individual, no aggravating. He did not use the prestige relation to tothers, designation or title…. Etc ambot di
and ascendancy. It is by utilizing the influence, prestige, klaro ang enunciation
and ascendancy that this aggravating circumstance will
be used against you. Relative position in civil or social life – priests, civic
leader (philanthropists)
Ex: malversation – being a public official is a must. You
cannot malverse a public fund if you are not a public AGE – old or tender age of the victim
official. Unsa pa, indirect bribery – public office ka. SEX – females only wahahaha .. take note nay mga
crimes na inherent ni cia na circumstances, rape,
Basis: perversity of the offender as shown by the means seuction, acts of lasciviousness
and personal circumstance of the offender, and by the Principle: the circumstance of insult or in disregard due
means used for the commission of the crime. Public to the offended part can be appreciated only in crimes
function is a public trust against persons or honor. Exn: dwelling

2) THE CRIME BE COMMITED IN CONTEMPT DWELLING - crimes against property or persons,

OF OR WITH INSULT TO PUBLIC chastity
AUTHORITIES
Cases for rank: killing of a staff sergeant, murder by a
Disrespect sa ila… public authority here is element sa pupil of his teacher, murder of municipal mayor,
pag identify sa aggravating Kailangan ba ang nagpatay mas ubos sa rank sa iyang
Basis: greater perversity of the offender as shown by gipatay? NO, it’s not required.
lack of respect to the public authorities
(People vs Pimentel): gipahubo ang blouse bago
Requisites: gipatay. Can aggravating circumstance of disregard of
- that the public authority is engaged in the sex be appreciated just because babae ang gipatay?
exercise of his functions NO. It must also especially show that the offender saw
- that the public authority is not the person to it that the victim would be a woman. It will not be
against whom the crime was committed. (why? sustained by the fact that the victim was a woman
Because kung siya ang target sa violation, most unless it can be established in court that aside from the
likely, direct assault. Contempt of public unlawful taking of the life, there was, in the commission
authority is inherent, it is a crime itself) of the crime, some specific insult or disrespect shown to
- that the offender knows him to be a public her womanhood.
authority (knowledge)
The aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank, age Transcript 7
or sex is not applicable in:
 Acted with passion or obfuscation – must be Dwelling and treachery – ame basis of aggravation,
derived from lawful sentiments, Treachery, you are conceptualizing means to weaken
 When there exists the relationship between the the efense of victim
offended party and the offender – example ang
imo asawa taas ug rank, then nag commit kag In dwelling, gigamit nimo ang dwelling para I disrespect
adultery sa inyong balay, ma consider ba ang siya. Mag adto ka sa balay, patyon nimo siya, obviously
rank? NO. dwelling? YES ma seclude mo, and ang means niya of defending
 When the condition of being a woman is himself ma weaken.
indispensable in the commission of the crime –
seduction, rape, abduction Gen rule: treachery will absorb dwelling.
Kung ang factual basis niya is separate, basically two
aggravating circumstances will be appreciated.
August 16, 2017 lecture
Example ni adto ka a balay, gusto nimo siya patyon,
pero before nimo siya gipatay, gi tali nimo siya,
Under the 24-hour principle, police officers as well as
giblindfold, diba treacherous na siya. Therefore gen rule,
bombero are considered performing their duties 24
pero in this instance, una nisulod ka sa balay para ma
hours a day. Remember that principle. Sila lang ana
seclude mo, pero gi tali pa nimo siya. It will be
others wala na. members of armed forces
appreciated distinctly and separately
PAR 3 – DWELLING
Dwelling is not aggravating in the ff circumstances: take
A dwelling is exclusively used for comfort and rest.
note of the technical description of the dwelling, sulod
Particular place than an individual can exercise his right
sa gate, dili pa.
to privacy. As long as naa siyay right to privacy, peace
of mind, right to rest, basially that is dwelling. It is not
- (Ppl vs nuguid): when both the offender and
required in the law na ikaw ang tag-iya sa balay. As long
as naa kay right to enjoy comfort, to rest, to have peace offended party are occupants of the same 🏡
of mind. You could be a guest house. Exn: adultery and concubinage.
Exemption to the rule in ppl vs nuguid. (chiz
GUEST VS VISITOR escudero case lels – jason abalos ang keks sa
Kung applicable ang dwelling, gamit mo ug guest. Do iya asawa, nakita sa cctv)
not use visitor
- When the robbery is committed with the use of
Technical definition of dwelling - under the force upon things – giguba nimo ang bintana sa
jurisprudence no, includes dependencies, staircase, etc balay, inherent na siya
(see book), it may include a room in a boarding house
(again the concept of dwelling).. - Robbery with the use of violence and
intimidation
(Ppl vs magnaye): the structure, the dwelling, was also
used as a market. Nay gi commit na crime. The - In the crime of trespass to dwelling, inherent
aggravating circumstance of dwelling cannot be siya na element
appreciated because we consider the dwelling as
EXCLUSIVELY used for rest and comfort. - When the victim is not the dweller of the house

(People vs lamahang): the place there is a house at the - When the owner of the dweller of the house
same time a store. Gina gapit siya for commercial gives provocation
purposes. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, this
particular structure, this may be considered as a Concept of provocation: the same sa tanan, dapat
dwelling. With respect to app of 280 and appreciation of sufficient – immediate to the commission of the crime
dwelling as aggravating circumstance. (automatically mitigating circumstance of provocation
will be appreciated)
In aggravating circumstance to dwelling, the accused
transgressed the sanctity due to the privacy, by PAR 4 ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE AND OBVIOUS
commiting the crime therein, thus the victim must UNGRATEFULNESS
(something) in the dweling. This is the reason why in the
case of magnaye, where the sc did not consider the There are 2 aggravating, kung present siya, separately
house which was also used as a store as it was imbued appreciated siya.
to public, nay public character ang balay ba, and tus the
law does not afford the sanctity of the dwelling The basis is element of abuse of trust. Naay
establishment of relationship here, kanang gina saligan
People vs Daniel?: naka, personal connection
People vs balansi:
Ppl vs ramolete In obvious ungratefulness, walay element of
relationship, no rapport. It is like naay gibuhat sa imo na
favorable, at the same time, gi violate nimo siya.
Supposed to be under ordinary circumstance, Requisite: kailangan ba naay gna perform na public
magpasalamat ka. function? Yes. Kung sabado dominggo, dili siya maging
aggravating
(People vs verdad): di daw I apil haha – houseboy, didto
siya nag stay pag buntag, treated as family. Naa DILI NI CIA MA APPRECIATE SA SPUR OF THE
personal connection diri. Later on, gibilin sa iya ang susi MOMENT SIT., CHANCE ENCOUNTER
kay naglakaw ang tag iya. Unsa iyang gi buhat, Pwede ba ni sa entrance? Wala man gi ingon na inside.
nagbuhat siyag crime. Basta mag cause ka ug disturbance

In short duha, abuse of confidence, kay naa na establish (PPL VS CANOY): polling precints. Nag binigyanay mo
na relationship, then, obvious ungratefulness. Kay tung ddto sa sulod sa compund lang.
time na to, gipa skwela pa jud siya. Pero ang sc, gi Par 2 vs par 5
appreciate nila as one. Because the leniency of criminal - in both, public authorities are in the
laws shall be interpreted in favor of the accused. Kung performance of their function
naay ingana na instance na separate, pwede nimo ni - in 2, pwede sa labas, offended party kay dili ang
gamiton na kaso. (in actual imposition of the penalty) public official

Elements of abuse of confidence: 4) place dedicated for rligious worship

- abuse of confidence facilitated the commission o Kailangan ba naay nag misa? No. ex,
of the crime. EXN: theft – here, abuse of malicious mischief, gilabayan nimog
confidence is inherent (qualified), art 62(1) tae ang simbahan, pwede na cia
- offender abused such trust
- offended party trusted the offender, personal ni PAR 6 NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE, AND BY
siya. Dili ma establish ang trust and confidence A BAND
sa 1 week lang, 3 days. Dapat gina ulit2 na cia.
Mura na ciag part sa family. Established na cia. Band, at least 4 people (quadrilla)
Basis: time and place and means and ways employed.
There are instances whe abuse of confidence is Sought after jud nimo na mag commit ug crime.
inherent in a particular crime. Absorbed by treachery daw ni.
- qualified seduction (ra 7877 na siya karon) –
persons na naay custody sa bata, ex teacher na (Ppl vs Santos): there are 3 distinct aggravating
naay gibuhat sa student. circumstance in this paragraph.

PAR 5 CRIME COMMITTEE IN THE PALACE OF General rule kung ma absorb, they will be appreciated
CHIEF EXEC, IN HIS PRSENCE, WHERE PUBLIC as one.
AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE
IF THEIR DUTIES AND IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO SC: there are tests kung gi unsa pag gamit ani na
RELIGIOUS WORSHIP aggravating circumstance:

Are these circumstances counted as 4? No. as one lang 1) It facilitated the commision of the crime- gigamit
ni cia. nimo siya to execute the crime
Basis: greater perversity in the place where the crime 2) Offender took advantage thereof for impunity.
was committed should be respected. Para maka takas

Ang target diri kay ang PLACE Meaning objective and subjective test.

1) Place of chief executive NIGHTTIME

o Kailangan ba na naay public function?
Dili. Ang minimum requirement is na 2 test, as long as ma establish ni, it will be aggravating.
commit nimo ang crime sa sulod. Maski Any of the 2 tests
sulod sa gate pwede na. NOCTURNIDAD – art 13 of civil code

2) In the presence of chief executive (Us vs dowdel): it is necessary that the commision of the
o Knowledge of the presence is crime be done and was completed at night time. Kung
important. Kung wala ka kabalo, dili ni dili nimo na complete and crime sa night time, this
ma apply. Dili kailangan na naa siyay cannot be utilized against you.
public purpose, kahit kumain lang siya
sa carenderia tapos alam mo na nanjan What if nasugdan before sunset then nahuman mga
siya. 2am? Then niikyas ka. Take note na gigamit nimo sa
pagtakas and take note sa tests, isa lang imong pwede
3) Place na naay gina perform na public function ma prove. In our example, gigamit nimo ang night time
o condition sine qua non. The law wants to accord impunity. PWEDE!
to protect the offices of public function.
Ddto a opisina sa pag-ibig, sa bir,.. etc.. Apprciated in separately with dwelling..

UNINHABITED PLACE - layo na lugar.

(Ppl vs laguardia): although the crime was committed in PAR 7 in occasion of conflagration, shipwreck, calamity
nighttime, dili automatic na I apply ang aggravating or other misfortune
circumstance. Misnomer ni cia. Dapat silence of the
night ang appropriate Basis: time of the commission. Of the crime.
Why discuss basis? Pwede ma absorb ang isa ka
(Ppl vs moran): night time cannot be appreciated if the aggravating circumstance kung lahi pero same ang
crime was committed in a crowded place, or naay street basis of aggravation.
lights, although at the wee hour. The darkness of the Double baded ni siya. Pwede siya mitigating or
night is the consideration. aggravating..

(Ppl vs banhaon) Kung dugay na kaayo ang calamity, then wala pajud lain
food, tapos naa pai tindahan na abundant.. nangawat
Kung sa factual basis separate ang night time and ka. Analogous circumstance..
treachery, separate na aggravating circcumstance na
siya. Pero kung bago pa, tsunami, daghan pag isda pero
nangawat kag corned beef, there, aggravating
circumstance of calamity..
UNINHABITED PLACE – any place na ma isolate ka, to
eliminate the possibility on the victim’s part to ask for Naay calamity, tapos naa pd pgka treachery imo
help. Maski ma dunggan sa mga balay sa seashore, pagpatay? Ma absorb ba ni treachery ang calamity? Dili
basta impossible maka hanap ug help, uninhabited siya ma absorb.
place gihapon na siya (kung sa dagat), pero kung sa Kani, serious physical injury lang, then aggra of
land, dili. treachery, pwede ma appreciate..then naay calamity.
Ma absorb ba? Noooo.. basis!
Perversity: isolation of the commission of the crime.
Even if the house is the only house in the place, and the Crash of airplane considered calamity? No. dapat
victims are the only inhabitants of the place, uninhabited widespread ang effect diri na circumstance. Mga 3
place shall be appreciated. provinces ang affected. Eroplano lng mana. 100+ ramo
kabuok..
It facilitates the commission and accords impunity. SC: thousand of passengers will not make it as a
To appreciate uninhabited place, it must be proven that misfortune as provided here. (shipwreck)
there were no inhabiting house nearby.
8 AID OF ARMED MEN
The uninhabited character of a place is determined not Definition – diff. to by a band.
by the distance of the nearest house but the scene of Weapons – anything that could cause injury
the crime and whether or not there was no possibility for
the victim to seek some help at the scene where the Elements:
crime was committed. –concept of isolation - The armed men are accomplices to take part in
minor capacity directly or indirectly. There is no
(Ppl vs santos): Jist is to prohibit isolation…. conspiracy here. Dili ma apprciate imputability
doctrine.
Nature: - The accused availed himself of the aid. This
circumstance should not be appreciated when
BY A BAND armed men acted in concert during the
4 armed men. commission of the crime
Ma absorb niya ang superior strength
Art 306, brigandage – punishable by mere conspiracy, Kailan dili ma appreciate ni?
robbery in the highway, kidnapping - When both the offender and the victim were
Kung 4 mo naa moy firearms, basically, naa ang band. armed. Ex kami duha ni hamoy, kamo ni quibin.
Necessarily, inherent ang band sa brigandage Kutsilyo inyoha baril amo. No concept of armed
men. Kay concept of rational equivalence.
Perpetrators – ma absorb ang by a band.. Unsa man ma appreciate, abuse of superior
strength
Robbery with violence can be committed by an - When the accused acted with conspiracy.
individual. Armed men or by a band can be appreciated. Mag apply baa ng armed sa chance encounter?
Dili siya inherent sa robbery. 294
This aggravating circumstance will be used against the
We use the men in the general sense as human beings. principal and accomplice. Ngano? Kay kung sa
Pag qualifying, nagiging inherent siya. Because it is part accomplice lang, mag pantay ang penalty sa principal.
of the definition of the crime. Pero nagsugod siya as
qualifying.. Accomplice na siya. Directly or indirectly nag tabang sa
imoha.

9 REICIDENCIA (RECIDIVISM) vs reiteracion, separate

na cia na aggravating. Dili na sila special. Dili ni siya ma
absorb sa isat isa. Dili pareho ang nature though pareha Next, kung nag commit kag crime, penalty kay prision
ang basis. correccional, then ang next na penalty sa second na
Pero dili pwede sila mag uban. crime kay arresto mayor, reiteracion? No. kaisa palang.
Kung lesser, dapat duha, tawag ana constituent offense.
Requirement: Then… and ika tulo kay arresto menor, take note,
- At the time of his trial for one crime, shall have previously punished
been previously convicted by final judgment of
another crime, embraced in the same title of the SC: what is meant by previously punished: served out
RPC the sentence. Meaning 6 years, then nahuman. Later on
another offense ( pwede ba reiteracion? Pwede ) maski
TERMS: dili the same title

“Trial” – judicial trial. It starts from ARRAIGNMENT. “serve out sentence” – nag run nawong? Ang service sa
sentence.
Ex: na held ka for preliminary investigation, tapos wala
pay judgment sa imong previous case, say murder, next Ex. Kung nag ikyas ka, 6 yrs imo penalty, nag tago ka
homicide. Covered by the same title. Tapos na held for 16 years. Jurisprudence interprets it as the same
liable ka sa homicide tapos gi raise na recidivist ka, later lang. ang kalisod sa imong pagtago for 15 years, the
on na convict ka sa murder. Then pag consideration sa same as having served your sentence. ART 92,
penalty sa homicide gi appreciate ang recidivism. You prescription of penalties
raise the defense na during preliminary investigation,
wala paka na convict for murder. Tapos nag commit nasad ug 2nd violation – PM, tapos
convicted. Pwede ba reiteracion? YES.
Tama pag appreciate. Ang term is judicial trial. You
cannot deny the fact that during the arraignment na Ex: 6 years, na serve nimo ang 2, ni ikyas ka for 16
convict na ka sa crime for murder, maski sa preliminary years. Naa kai na commit na crime dri, tng pag ikyas
investigation sa homicide wala paka na convict sa nimo art 157, so 2nd offense na ang pag ikyas nimo.
murder.
Tapos nag commit nasad ka ug offense. Q: asa ta
“By final judgment”, kailangan ba na serve out nimo ang magkuha ug basis for reiteracion? Sa 2 nd? No. wala
sentence? NO. basta kay na convict lang ka by final paka nag serve out sa sentence sa 2 nd. So sa first ang
judgment. gamiton. Take note why? Previously served dapat.
Ang constituent offenses for reiteracion dapat dili
THERE IS NO TIME ELEMENT HERE. MASKI 20 years covered sa the same title of the RPC
pero covered the same title, recidivist ka gihapon.

Procedural: kailangan I allege nimo ang info sa

recidivist. Rule 110 sec 8&9. Pag wala na allege, you
do not have the right to prove that in court. It will violate
the right of the accused to be informed of the allegations
against him.

PARDON DOES NOT EXTINGUISH PENALTY FROM

PREVIOUS CONVICTION

Kung mag grant ug pardon ang president, pag

conditional pardon, dili mag extinguish ang taint of
criminal propensity nimo.

AMNESTY MA EXTINGUISH TANAN

(PEOPLE VS GALANG): if both offenses were

committed on the same day, they shall be considered
as one.

10 REITERACION
Requisites:
- Offender has been previously punished by an
offense to which the law attaches an equal or
greater penalty, or for two or more crimes for
lighter penalty

Ex: ng commit kag crime next then ang penalty kay

greater or equal than sa first nimo na commit.
Reiteracion? Yes.