You are on page 1of 20

Reminders in Criminal Law

(Part 1)

Criminal Law
Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of
their nature, and provides for their punishment.

Crime is defined as an act committed or omitted in violation of public law


forbidding or commanding it. It is a positive or negative act in violation of penal
law; an offense against the state.

Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code.
Felonies are classified according to the means by which they are committed, into:
(a) intentional felonies, and (b) culpable felonies. (Article 3, Revised Penal Code)

Accused is a person formally charged in court for having violated a penal law
either the Revised Penal Code or a special penal law.

Rationale for the Liberal Construction of Penal Laws


The principle of statutory construction that penal laws are liberally construed
in favor of the accused and strictly against the State is deeply rooted in the need to
protect constitutional guarantees. This principle serves notice to the public that only
those acts clearly and plainly prohibited in penal laws are subject to criminal
sanctions. To expand penal laws beyond their clear and plain meaning is no longer
fair notice to the public. Thus, the principle insures observance of due process and
equal protection of the law. (Tenebro vs. CA, G.R. No. 150758, 18 February 2004)

Limitations on the Legislative Power to Enact Penal Laws


a. No ex post facto law shall be enacted

b. No bill of attainder shall be enacted

c. No law that violates equal protection clause of the constitution shall be


enacted

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


fines shall be enacted.

Characteristics of Criminal Law


General. Philippine criminal laws are binding on all persons who live or
sojourn in the Philippines. Whoever you are, whatever be your creed, religion, sex
or nationality, as long as you reside in the Philippine territory penal laws of the
Philippines shall apply on you. Exception: (a) Treaty stipulations; (b) Laws of
preferential application; and, (c) Principles of Public International Law.

Territorial. Philippine criminal law undertakes to punish crimes committed


only within the Philippine territory. Outside of the parameters of the Philippine
archipelago, Philippine criminal laws can not be enforced. Exception: Under Art. 2
of the Revised Penal Code, Philippine criminal laws shall be enforced outside of the
jurisdiction of our country against those who:

a. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship.


b. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippines
or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippines.

c. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into the
Philippines of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding
number.

d. While being public offers or employees, should commit an offense in


the exercise of their functions; or,

e. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law
of nations defined in Title One of Book Two of the Revised Penal Code.
(Article 2, Revised Penal Code)

Prospective. A penal law can not make an act punishable when it was not
punishable when committed. Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the
time the same were perpetrated. There is no crime without a penalty and there is
no penalty without a law. Exception: Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect
insofar as they favor the person guilty of a felony who is not a habitual criminal.

Intentional Crimes and Crimes by Means of Negligence


In intentional crimes, the act itself is punished; in negligence or imprudence,
what is principally penalized is the mental attitude or condition behind the act, the
dangerous recklessness, lack of care or foresight, the imprudencia punible.
Compared to intentional felonies, such as homicide or murder, what takes the place
of the element of malice or intention to commit a wrong or evil is the failure of the
offender to take precautions due to lack of skill taking into account his employment,
or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition, and other circumstances
regarding persons, time, and place. (People vs. Garcia, G.R. No. 153591, 23
February 2004)

Mistake of Fact and Ignorance of the Law

Mistake of fact is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who


caused injury to another. Such person will not incur any criminal liability since 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.

As a general rule, mistake of fact or good faith of the accused is a valid


defense in a prosecution for a felony by dolo; such defense negates malice or
criminal intent. However, ignorance of the law is not an excuse because everyone
is presumed to know the law. Ignorantia legis non excusat. (Manuel vs. People,
G.R. No. 165842, 29 November 2005)

Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita

Mala in se are crimes which are wrong from their nature, such as murder,
theft, rape, etc., while those that are mala prohibita are wrong, merely because
they are prohibited by statute, like Illegal Possession of Firearm or violation of the
Omnibus Election Law.

Crimes mala in se are those so serious in their effects or society as to call for
the almost unanimous condemnation of its members, while crimes mala prohibita
are violations of mere rules of convenience designed to secure a more orderly
regulation of the affairs of society.

Good Faith Not a Valid Defense against Crimes Mala Prohibita


This distinction between crimes mala in se and crimes mala prohibita is
important with reference to the intent with which a wrongful act is done. The rule
on the subject is that in acts mala in se, the intent governs; but in acts mala
prohibita, the only inquiry is, has the law been violated? When an act is illegal, the
intent of the offender is immaterial and good faith is not a valid defense. (Tan vs.
Ballena, G.R. No. 168111, 4 July 2008)

Crimes May Be Committed Even Without Criminal Intent

In felonies committed by means of culpa, criminal intent is replaced by


negligence and imprudence. Upon the other hand, in crimes mala prohibita, it is
merely required that the offender has the intention to perpetrate the act prohibited
by the special penal law. In both instances, the existence of criminal intent is no
longer required.

A Special Penal Law may be considered as Mala in Se

When the acts punished by special penal laws are inherently immoral or
inherently wrong, they are still considered as mala in se and it does not matter that
such acts are punished under the Revised Penal Code. In fact, in plunder, its
predicate crimes are mainly mala in se for being wrong by nature. Thus, it would be
absurd to treat prosecutions for plunder as though they are mere prosecutions for
violations of the Bouncing Check Law or of an ordinance against jaywalking, without
regard to the inherent wrongness of the acts. (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
148560, 10 November 2001)

Intent and Motive

Motive is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite result.
Intent, on the other hand, is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such
result. Motive alone is not proof of a crime. In order to tip the scales in its favor,
intent and not motive must be established by the prosecution. Motive is hardly ever
an essential element of a crime.

Circumstances when Motive is Relevant

As an accepted principle, proof of motive in criminal prosecutions is neither


indispensable nor necessary if the guilt of the accused is otherwise established by
sufficient evidence, as the absence of motive or the apparent lack of it is not proof
of innocence.

However, when there is no eyewitness and there is doubt as to whether the


accused is or is not the person who committed the offense charged, the question of
motive becomes important. In such case, proof of motive is a substantial aid in
completing the proof of the commission of the crime by the accused and in
attaining the necessary judicial perspective of the case. (People vs. Abillar, G.R. No.
134606, 29 November 2000)

Criminal Liability

Criminal Liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony


although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. It shall
also be incurred by any person performing an act with malice which would have
been 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. (Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code)
Proximate Cause

That cause, which, in the natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces the injury without which the result would not
have occurred.

The perceived delay in giving medical treatment to an offended party does


not break at all the causal connection between the wrongful act of the offender and
the injuries sustained by the victim. It does not constitute efficient intervening
cause.

It is settled that anyone inflicting injuries is responsible for all the


consequences of his criminal act such as death that supervenes in consequence of
the injuries. The fact that the injured did not receive proper medical attendance
would not affect the offender's criminal responsibility. The rule is founded on the
practical policy of closing to the wrongdoer a convenient avenue of escape from the
just consequences of his wrongful act. If the rule were otherwise, many criminals
could avoid just accounting for their acts by merely establishing a doubt as to the
immediate cause of death. (People vs. Acuram, G.R. No. 117954, 27 April 2000)

Aberratio Ictus, Error in Personae and Praeter Intentionem

Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow occurs when the offender delivered the
blow at his intended victim but missed, and instead such blow landed on another
person. The situation generally brings about complex crimes where from a single
act, two or more grave or less grave felonies resulted, namely the attempt against
the intended victim and the consequences on the unintended victim.

Error in personae or mistake in identity occurs when the offender actually hit
the person to whom the blow was directed but turned out to be different from and
not the victim intended. The criminal liability of the offender is not affected, unless
the mistake in identity resulted to a crime different from what the offender intended
to commit, in which case the lesser penalty between the crime intended and the
crime committed shall be imposed but in the maximum period. (Article 49 of the
Revised Penal Code).

Praeter intentionem or where the consequences went beyond that intended


or expected. This is a mitigating circumstance (Article 13, paragraph 3 of the
Revised Penal Code) when there is a notorious disparity between the act or means
employed by the offender and the resulting felony clearly indicating that the
resulting felony could not be reasonably anticipated or foreseen by the offender
from the act or means employed by him.

Classification of Felonies According to Stage of Execution:

a. Consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present.

b. Frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which
would produce the felony as a consequence but which nevertheless do
not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.

c. Attempted 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. (Art. 6, Revised Penal
Code)

There is No Frustrated Theft


The elements of the crime of theft as provided for in Article 308 of the
Revised Penal Code are: (1) that there be taking of personal property; (2) that said
property belongs to another; (3) that the taking be done with intent to gain; (4) that
the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and (5) that the taking be
accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force
upon things.

The ability of the offender to freely dispose of the property stolen is not a
constitutive element of the crime of theft. Viewed from that perspective, it is
immaterial to the product of the felony that the offender, once having committed all
the acts of execution for theft, is able or unable to freely dispose of the property
stolen since the deprivation from the owner alone has already ensued from such
acts of execution. Theft, thus, cannot have a frustrated stage. Theft can only be
attempted or consummated. (Valenzuela vs. People, G.R. No. 160188, 21 June
2007)

There is No Frustrated Rape

There is no such crime as frustrated rape. Clearly, in the crime of rape, from
the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim, he actually attains his
purpose and, from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have
been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender, because he
has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is
consummated.

For the consummation of rape, perfect penetration is not essential. Any


penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or
lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is
sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no
penetration of the female organ because not all acts of execution were performed.
(People vs. Orande, G.R. Nos. 141724-27, 12 November 2003).

Overt Acts

Some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to commit a particular


crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried to its complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external
obstacles, nor by voluntary desistance of the perpetrator will logically ripen into a
concrete offense.

Indeterminate Offense

An offense where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not


certain. The accused maybe convicted for a felony defined by the acts performed
by him up to the time of desistance. (Baleros vs. People, G.R. No. 138033, 22
February 2006).

Light Felonies

Light Felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated,
unless committed against persons or property where the acts would be punishable
even if not consummated. (Art. 7, Revised Penal Code).

In light felonies only principals and accomplices are liable, accessories are
not liable even if committed against persons or property. (Art. 16, Revised Penal
Code)

Conspiracy as a Manner of Incurring Criminal Liability


The requisites of conspiracy are the following: (a) two (2) or more persons
came to an agreement; (b) the agreement pertains to the commission of a felony;
and, (c) the execution of the felony was decided upon.

Doctrine of Implied Conspiracy

The doctrine of implied conspiracy holds two or more persons participating in


the commission of a crime collectively responsible and liable as co-conspirators
although absent any agreement to that effect, when they act in concert,
demonstrating unity of criminal intent and a common purpose or objective. The
existence of a conspiracy shall be inferred or deduced from their criminal
participation in pursuing the crime and thus the act of one shall be the act of all.
(People vs. Musa, G.R. No. 137042, 17 June 2003).

There may even be conspiracy even if an offender does not know the
identities of the other offenders, and even though he is not aware of all the details
of the plan of operation or was not in on the scheme from the beginning. One need
only to knowingly contribute his efforts in furtherance of it. One who joins a
criminal conspiracy in effect adopts as his own the criminal designs of his co-
conspirators.

Individual Criminal Liability

In the absence of any previous conspiracy, unity of criminal purpose and


intention immediately before the commission of the crime, or community of criminal
design, the criminal responsibility arising from different acts directed against one
and the same person is individual and not collective, and each of the participants is
liable only for the act committed by him. (People vs. Desoy, G.R. No. 127754, 16
August 1999).

Classification of Felonies According to Gravity

a. 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 the Revised Penal Code.

b. Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with
penalties which in their maximum period are correctional, in
accordance with Article 25 of the Revised Penal Code.

c. Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of


which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos,
or both, is provided.

Classification important: (a) to determine whether these felonies can be


complexed or not; and, (b) to determine the prescription of the crime and the
prescription of the penalty.

Justifying Circumstances

Those circumstances where the act of a person is said to be in accordance


with law, so that such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is
free from both criminal liability. There is also no civil liability, except in paragraph 4
where the civil liability is borne by the persons benefited by the act.

The following persons do not incur any criminal liability, their acts being
justified and lawful (Article 11, Revised Penal Code):

1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that there
was: (a) unlawful aggression; (b) reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it; and, (c) lack of sufficient provocation
on the part of the person defending himself.
2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse,
ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or
sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree.

3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger.

4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which
causes damage to another.

5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful


exercise of a right or office.

6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for


some lawful purpose.

Self-Defense

Self-defense includes not only the defense of the person or body of the one
assaulted but also that of his rights, the enjoyment of which is protected by law.
Self-defense also includes defense of honor and defense of a persons property
rights. Thus, a slap on the face is considered as unlawful aggression directed
against the honor of the actor which may give rise to a valid claim of self-defense.

Unlawful Aggression

As an element of self-defense, unlawful aggression refers to an assault or


attack, or a threat thereof in an imminent and immediate manner, which places the
defendant's life in actual peril. There is an unlawful aggression on the part of the
victim when he puts in actual or imminent danger the life, limb, or right of the
person invoking self-defense.

There must be actual physical force or actual use of weapon. To constitute


unlawful aggression, the person attacked must be confronted by a real threat on his
life and limb; and the peril sought to be avoided is imminent and actual, not merely
imaginary. (Mahawan vs. People, G.R. No. 176609, 18 December 2008)

Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed

The reasonableness of the means employed depends upon the nature and
quality of the (1) weapon used by the aggressor, and (2) his physical condition,
character, size and other circumstances, (3) and those of the person defending
himself, (4) and also the place and occasion of the assault. However, perfect
equality between the weapons used by the one defending himself and that of the
aggressor is not required since the person assaulted may not have sufficient
tranquility of mind to think and to calculate.

Self-Defense and Fulfillment of Duty

Self-defense and fulfillment of duty operate on different principles. Self-


defense is based on the principle of self-preservation from mortal harm, while
fulfillment of duty is premised on the due performance of duty.

Unlike in self-defense where unlawful aggression is an element, in


performance of duty, unlawful aggression from the victim is not a requisite. A
policeman in the performance of duty 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. Since a policeman's duty requires him to overcome the offender, the force
exerted by the policeman may therefore differ from that which ordinarily may be
offered in self-defense. (Cabanlig vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148431, 28 July
2005)

Exempting Circumstances

These are grounds for exemption from punishment, because there is a


deficiency in the agent of the crime or any of the conditions which makes the act
voluntary, or negligent. The exemption from punishment is based on the complete
absence of intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the absence of
negligence on the part of the accused.

The following are exempt from criminal liability (Article 12, Revised Penal
Code):

1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a


lucid interval.

2. A person under nine years of age.

3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has acted
with discernment. (Amended by Republic Act No. 9344)

4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes
an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.

5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.

6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an


equal or greater injury.

7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when


prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.

Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility (RA 9344)

A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the
offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be
subjected to an intervention program under the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
2006 (RA 9344).

A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age shall
likewise be exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an intervention
program, unless he/she has acted with discernment.

The exemption from criminal liability however does not include exemption
from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with existing laws.

Insanity and Imbecility

Insanity or imbecility exists when there is a complete deprivation of


intelligence or freedom of the will. An insane person is not so exempt if it can be
shown that he acted during a lucid interval. But an imbecile is exempt in all cases
from criminal liability. The defense must prove that the accused was insane at the
time of the commission of the crime because the presumption is always in favor of
sanity. (People vs. Pambid, G.R. No. 124453, 15 March 2000).

Compulsion of Irresistible Force

For duress to exempt accused-appellant of the crimes charged, the fear must
be well-founded, and immediate and actual danger of death or great bodily harm
must be present and the compulsion must be of such a character as to leave no
opportunity for the accuse to escape or interpose self-defense in equal combat.
Entrapment and Instigation

Instigation is the means by which the accused is lured into the commission of
the offense charged in order to prosecute him. On the other hand, entrapment is
the employment of such ways and means for the purpose of trapping or capturing a
lawbreaker.

Thus, in instigation, officers of the law or their agents incite, induce, instigate
or lure an accused into committing an offense which he or she would otherwise not
commit and has no intention of committing. But in entrapment, the criminal intent
or design to commit the offense charged originates in the mind of the accused, and
law enforcement officials merely facilitate the apprehension of the criminal by
employing ruses and schemes; thus, the accused cannot justify his or her conduct.

In instigation, where law enforcers act as co-principals, the accused will have
to be acquitted. But entrapment cannot bar prosecution and conviction. As has
been said, instigation is a "trap for the unwary innocent", while entrapment is a
"trap for the unwary criminal. (People vs. Bayani, G.R. No. 179150, 17 June 2008).

Mitigating Circumstances

Those circumstances which if present in the commission of the crime, do not


entirely free the actor from criminal liability but serve only to reduce the penalty
due to the diminution of either freedom of action intelligence or intent or on the
lesser perversity of the offender.

The following are mitigating circumstances (Article 13, Revised Penal Code):

1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances or when all the


requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the
respective cases are not attendant.

2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years.
(Amended by Republic Act No. 9344)

3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that


committed.

4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party


immediately preceded the act.

5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave


offense to the one committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants, or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees.

6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have


produced passion or obfuscation.

7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in


authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the
prosecution;

8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some
physical defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or
communications with his fellow beings.

9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-
power of the offender without however depriving him of the
consciousness of his acts.

10. Any other circumstances of a similar nature and analogous to those


above mentioned.
Provocation

Provocation is any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party,


capable of exciting, inciting or irritating any one: (a) the provocation must be
sufficient; (b) it must originate from the offended party; (c) the provocation must be
immediate to the commission of the crime by the person who is provoked; and, (d)
the threat should not be offensive and positively strong, otherwise, the threat to
inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression, which may then give rise to self-defense.

Passion or Obfuscation

In passion or obfuscation: (a) there must be an act, both unlawful and


sufficient to produce such a condition of mind; (b) the act which produced the
obfuscation was not far removed from the commission of the crime by a
considerable length of time, during which the perpetrator might recover his normal
equanimity; (c) it must come from lawful sentiments; and, (d) it must not arise from
the spirit of lawlessness or a spirit of revenge. (People vs. Bates, G.R. No. 139907,
28 March 2003)

Voluntary Surrender and Plea of Guilt

The following are the requisites of voluntary surrender: (a) that the offender
had not actually been arrested; (b) that the offender surrendered himself to a
person in authority or to the latters agent; and, (c) that the surrender was
voluntary.

A surrender, to be voluntary, must be spontaneous, showing the intent of the


accused to submit himself unconditionally, either because: (a) he acknowledges his
guilt; or, (b) he wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred in
his search and capture.

On the other hand, the requisites for voluntary plea of guilty are as follows:
(a) that the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt; (b) that the confession of
guilt was made in open court, that is, before the competent court that is to try the
case; and, (c) that the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of
evidence for the prosecution.

Aggravating Circumstances

Those circumstances which, if attendant in the commission of the crime,


serve to increase the penalty without, however, exceeding the maximum of the
penalty provided by law for the offense, due to the greater perversity of the
offender manifested in the commission of the felony as shown by: (a) the
motivating power itself; (b) the place of the commission; (c) the means and ways
employed; (d) the time; or, (e) the personal circumstances of the offender, or the
offended party. (Article 14, Revised Penal Code)

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

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


authorities.

3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect


due the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be
committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not
given provocation.

4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious


ungratefulness.
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in
his presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge
of their duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship.

6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an uninhabited


place, or by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the
commission of the offense.

7. 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.

8. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration,


shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.

9. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons
who insure or afford impunity.

10. That the accused is a recidivist.

11. 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.

12. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or


promise.

13. 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.

14. That the act be committed with evident premeditation.

15. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.

16. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed


to weaken the defense.

17. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).

18. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add


ignominy to the natural effects of the act.

19. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.

20. 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).

21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions.

Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances

a. Generic those which apply to all crimes.

b. Specific those which apply only to specific crimes, such as ignominy


in crimes against chastity and cruelty and treachery which are
applicable only to crimes against persons.

c. Qualifying those that change the nature of the crime like treachery
and evident premeditation which qualify the killing of a person to
murder.

d. Inherent those that of necessity accompany the commission of the


crime.
e. Special those which arise under special conditions to increase the
penalty of the offense and cannot be offset by mitigating
circumstances.

Advantage of Public Position

The offender must have abused his public position or at least that the same
facilitated the commission of the offense. To appreciate this aggravating
circumstance, the public officer must use the influence, prestige or ascendancy
which his office gives him as a means by which he realizes his purpose. The
essence of the matter is presented in the inquiry "Did the accused abuse his office
to commit the crime?" (People vs. Villamor, G.R. Nos. 140407-08, 15 January 2002).

This circumstance, however, cannot be taken into consideration in offenses


where taking advantage of official position is made by law an integral element of
the crime, such as in malversation or in falsification of a document committed by
public officers.

Circumstances that Negate the Existence of Treachery

Jurisprudence dictates that chance encounters, impulse killing or crimes


committed at the spur of the moment or those that were preceded by heated
altercations are generally not attended by treachery for lack of opportunity of the
accused to deliberately employ a treacherous mode of attack. For the rules on
treachery to apply, the attack must have been preconceived by the accused,
unexpected by the victim and without provocation on the part of the latter. (People
vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. 139542, 21 June 2001).

Treachery When Present

When the aggression is continuous, treachery must be present in the


beginning of the assault. When the assault was not continuous, in that there was
interruption, it is sufficient that treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow
was given. (People vs. Abendan, G.R. Nos. 132026-27, 28 June 2001).

Treachery absorbs: (a) craft; (b) abuse of superior strength; (c) employing
means to weaken the defense; (d) band; (e) aid of armed men; and, (f) nighttime.

Recidivism and Habitual Delinquency

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 the Revised Penal Code.

Habitual delinquent is a person who, within a period of ten (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 said
crimes a third time or oftener.

Reiteracion or habituality is present when the accused, who is on trial for one
offense, has been previously sentenced for another offense to which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty, or for two (2) or more crimes to which it
attaches a higher penalty than that for the new offense

Quasi-recidivism is present when a person shall commit a felony after having


been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such sentence, or while
serving the same. He shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty
prescribed by law for the new felony.

Dwelling Not Aggravating


Dwelling not aggravating when: (a) both the offender and the offended party
are occupants of the same house, and this is true even if offender is a servant in the
house; (b) robbery is committed by the use of force upon things, where dwelling is
inherent; (c) in the crime of trespass to dwelling where it is also inherent; (d) when
the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediate provocation; and, (e) the
victim is not a dweller of the house.

Evident Premeditation

To establish evident premeditation, it must be shown that there was a period


sufficient to afford full opportunity for meditation and reflection, a time adequate to
allow the conscience to overcome the resolution of the will, as well as outward acts
showing the intent to kill. It must appear not only that the accused decided to
commit the crime prior to the moment of its execution but also that this decision
was the result of meditation, calculation, reflection, or persistent attempt. (People
vs. Silva, GR No. 140871, 8 August 2002).

The aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation cannot co-exist with


the circumstance of passion and obfuscation. The essence of premeditation is that
the execution of the criminal act must be preceded by calm thought and reflection
upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space of time
sufficient to arrive at a composed judgment. Verily, a finding that there was a
preconceived plan to kill would negate passion and obfuscation. (People vs.
Emperador, GR No. 132669, 25 September 2002)

Nighttime

That period of darkness beginning at end of dusk and ending at dawn. Nights
are from sunset to sunrise. It is necessary that the commission of the crime was
begun and completed at nighttime.

By and of itself, nighttime is not an aggravating circumstance. It becomes so


only when it is especially sought by the offender, or taken advantage of by him to
facilitate the commission of the crime or to insure his immunity from capture.
When the place of the crime is illuminated by light, nighttime is not aggravating.

Abuse of Superior Strength

Superiority in number does not necessarily amount to the aggravating


circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength. It is necessary to show that
the aggressors cooperated in such a way as to secure advantage from their
superiority in strength.

There must be proof of the relative physical strength of the aggressors and
the assaulted party or proof that the accused simultaneously assaulted the
deceased. The circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength depends on
the age, size and strength of the parties. It is considered whenever there is a
notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assessing a
superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor which is selected
or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime (People vs. Aliben, GR
No. 140404, 27 February 2003).

Ignominy

Ignominy is defined as a circumstance pertaining to the moral order which


adds disgrace and obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime. The following
circumstances are considered ignominious in the crime of rape:

a. where the accused ordered the complainant to exhibit to them her


complete nakedness for about ten minutes before raping her;
b. where the rape was committed in front of the husband of the victim or
by two or more persons in view of one another;

c. where the sexual intercourse was performed in the "dog style"


position;

d. where the accused plastered mud on the victim's private part;

e. where the victim was pregnant and whose pleas on that ground were
ignored by the accused who went on to force his lust on her; and,

f. when the accused tied a banana fiber around his penis and inserted it
into the vagina of the offended party, then the accused pulled out his
organ and forced the victim to suck it. (People vs. Bacule, G.R. No.
127568, 28 January 2000)

Cruelty

In order for cruelty to be appreciated, there must be evidence that the


wounds found on the body of the victim were inflicted while he was still alive in
order unnecessarily to prolong physical suffering. If the victim was already dead
when the acts of mutilation were being performed, this would also qualify the killing
to murder due to outraging of his corpse.

Persons Criminally Liable for Felonies

Principals are those: (a) those who take a direct part in the execution of the
act; (b) those who directly force or induce others to commit it; and, (c) those who
cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it would
not have been accomplished. (Article 17, Revised Penal Code)

Accomplices are those persons who, not being principals, cooperate in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. (Article 18, Revised
Penal Code)

Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the


crime, and without having participated therein, either as principals or accomplices,
take part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners:

a. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the


effects of the crime;

b. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or


instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery; or,

c. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of


the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public
functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason,
parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive,
or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime. (Article 19,
Revised Penal Code)

Liable Accomplices

To be convicted as an accomplice, it is necessary that the accused be aware


of the criminal intent of the principal and then cooperate knowingly or intentionally
by supplying material or moral aid for the efficacious execution of the crime.

To consider a person an accomplice in the commission of the offense, the


following must concur: (1) community of design - knowing the criminal design of the
principal by direct participation, one concurs therein; (b) cooperation in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the intention of
supplying material and moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious
way; and (c) a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed
to the person charged as accomplice.

To be deemed an accomplice, one needs to have had both knowledge of and


participation in the criminal act. In other words, the principal and the accomplice
must have acted in conjunction and directed their efforts to the same end. Thus, it
is essential that both were united in their criminal design (People vs. Fabros, G.R.
No. 139179, 3 April 2002).

Accessories Exempt from Criminal Liability

The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who
are such with respect to principals who are their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within
the same degrees, with the single exception of accessories who profited themselves
or assisted the offender to profit themselves by the effects of the crime. (Article 20,
Revised Penal Code)

Penalties

Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of
the law. The State has an existence of its own to maintain, a conscience to assert,
and moral principles to be vindicated. The following are the juridical conditions of
penalty:

1. Must be productive of suffering, without however affecting the integrity


of the human personality.

2. Must be commensurate with the offense different crimes must be


punished with different penalties.

3. Must be personal no one should be punished for the crime of another.

4. Must be legal it is the consequence of a judgment according to law.

5. Must be certain no one may escape its effects.

6. Must be correctional.

7. Must be equal for all.

Theories Justifying the Imposition of Penalties

1. Prevention to prevent or suppress the danger to the State arising


from the criminal act of the offender.

2. Self-defense so as to protect society from the threat and wrong


inflicted by the criminal.

3. Reformation the object of punishment in criminal cases is to correct


and reform the offender.

4. Exemplarity the criminal is punished to serve as an example to deter


others from committing crimes.

5. Justice that crime must be punished by the State as an act of


retributive justice, a vindication of absolute right and moral law
violated by the criminal.

Pardon of the Offended Party


If the offended party already pardoned the offender, the prosecutor may still
prosecute the offender. Such pardon by the offended party is not even a ground for
the dismissal of the complaint or information.

A criminal offense is an outrage to the sovereign State and to the State


belongs the power to prosecute and punish crimes. By itself, an affidavit of
desistance is not a ground for the dismissal of an action, once it has been instituted
in court. A private complainant loses the right or absolute privilege to decide
whether the rape charge should proceed, because the case was already filed and
must therefore continue to be heard by the trial court. (People vs. Dimaano, G.R.
No. 168168, 14 September 2005)

Pardon by the Chief Executive and the Offended Party

Pardon by the Chief Executive: (a) extinguishes criminal liability; (b) can
extend to any crime, unless otherwise provided by or subject to conditions in the
Constitution or the laws; (c) cannot affect the civil liability ex delicto of the offender;
(d) can be extended only after conviction by final judgment of the accused; (e) may
be absolute or conditional; and, (f) extended to any or all of the accused.

Pardon of the Offended Party: (a) does not extinguish criminal liability
although it may constitute a bar to the prosecution of the offender; (b) applies only
to the offenses of seduction, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness, adultery and
concubinage; (c) the offended party may waive the civil liability; (d) can be granted
only before the institution of the criminal action; (e) cannot validly be made subject
to a condition; and, (f) in adultery and concubinage, the pardon must include both
offenders. (People vs. Dela Cerna, G.R. Nos. 136899-904, 9 October 2002)

Duration and Effects of Penalties

Reclusion perpetua Twenty years and one day to forty years. Any person
sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be pardoned after
undergoing the penalty for thirty years, unless such person by reason of his
conduct or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief
Executive as unworthy of pardon.

Reclusion temporal Twelve years and one day to twenty years.

Prision mayor Six years and one day to twelve years.

Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro Six months and one day to
six years.

Arresto mayor One month and one day to six months.

Arresto menor One day to thirty days.

Bond to keep the peace The bond to keep the peace shall be required to
cover such period of time as the court may determine. (Article 27, Revised
Penal Code)

Complex Crimes

There is a complex crime when a single act constitutes two or more grave or
less grave felonies or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the
other. In a complex crime, although two or more crimes are actually committed,
they constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law as well as in the conscience of
the offender. The offender has only one criminal intent, hence there is only one
penalty imposed for the commission of a complex crime.

The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime, the
same to be applied in its maximum period. If different crimes resulting from one
single act are punished with the same penalty, the penalty for any one of them shall
be imposed, the same to be applied in the maximum period. (Article 48, Revised
Penal Code)

Plurality of Crimes and Continuing Crimes

Plurality of crimes consists in the successive execution, by the same


individual, of different criminal acts, upon any of which no conviction has yet been
declared. Upon the other hand, a continuing crime is a single crime, consisting of a
series of acts, but all arising from one criminal resolution where length of time in
the commission is immaterial.

Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act No. 4103)

A sentence with a minimum term and a maximum term which, the court is
mandated to impose for the benefit of a guilty person who is not disqualified
therefore, when the maximum imprisonment exceeds one (1) year. It applies to
both violations of Revised Penal Code and special penal laws.

The basic purpose of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is to "to uplift and
redeem valuable human material, and prevent unnecessary and excessive
deprivation of personal liberty and economic usefulness" (People vs. Temporada,
G.R. No. 173473, 17 December 2008).

The Indeterminate Sentence Law shall not apply to the following persons:

1. sentenced to death penalty or life imprisonment;

2. treason, or conspiracy or proposal to commit treason;

3. misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage;

4. piracy;

5. habitual delinquents;

6. escaped from confinement, or evaded sentence;

7. granted with conditional pardon by the President, but violated the


terms thereof;

8. maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed 1 year; and,

9. sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension only.

Probation Law of 1976

Probation is a disposition under which an offender, after conviction and


sentence, is released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the
supervision of a probation officer, upon application by the offender within the period
for perfecting an appeal.

Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposed a term of


imprisonment or fine only. However, no application for probation shall be
entertained or granted if the offender has perfected an appeal from the judgment of
conviction.

Probation is not available when:

a. The offender is in need of correctional treatment that can be provided


effectively by his commitment to an institution;

b. There is undue risk of committing another crime;

c. Probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense committed;


d. The offender was sentenced to serve a maximum term of
imprisonment of more the six (6) years;

e. The offender was convicted of subversion or any crime against the


national security or the public order;

f. The offender was previously convicted by final judgment of an offense


punished by imprisonment of not less than 1 month and 1 day and/or a
fine not less than P200;

g. The offender had already been once placed on probation. (Sections 8


and 9, Presidential Decree 968)

Period of Probation

If the convict is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than one


year, the period of probation shall not exceed two years. In all other cases, if he is
sentenced to more than one year, said period shall not exceed six years. When the
sentence imposes a fine only and the offender is made to serve subsidiary
imprisonment, the period of probation shall be twice the total number of days of
subsidiary imprisonment (Section 14, Presidential Decree 968).

Extinction of Criminal Liability

Criminal liability is totally extinguished by:

1. The death of the convict;

2. Service of the sentence;

3. Amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects;

4. Absolute pardon;

5. Prescription of the crime;

6. Prescription of the penalty; and,

7. Marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of the


Revised Penal Code. (Article 89, Revised Penal Code)

Upon the other hand, criminal liability is partially extinguished by:

1. Conditional pardon;

2. Commutation of the sentence; and

3. Good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is


serving his sentence. (Article 94, Revised Penal Code)

Amnesty and Pardon

Amnesty is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or general pardon


for a past offense usually extended in favor of certain classes of persons who are
subject to trial but have not yet been convicted. It looks forward and relieves the
offender from the consequences of an offense of which he has been convicted; it
does not work for the restoration of the rights to hold public office, or the right of
suffrage, unless such rights are expressly restored by means of pardon.

Pardon is an act of grace, proceeding from the power entrusted with the
execution of the laws, which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from
the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed. It looks backward
and abolishes and puts into oblivion the offense itself; it so overlooks and
obliterates the offense with which he is charged that the person released by
amnesty stands before the law precisely as though he had committed no offense
(Llamas vs. Orbos, G.R. No. 99031, 15 October 1991).

Prescription of Crimes and Penalties

Prescription of the crime is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to
prosecute the offender, after the lapse of a certain time. Meanwhile, prescription of
the penalty is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the government to execute the
final sentence, after the lapse of a certain time. (Board of Commissioners vs. Dela
Rosa, G.R. Nos. 95122-23, 31 May 1991)

Prescriptive Period for Crimes

Crimes punishable by:

a) Death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal twenty years

b) afflictive penalties fifteen years

c) correctional penalties ten years except those punishable by


arresto mayor which shall prescribe in five years.

Crime of libel one year

Offenses of oral defamation and slander by deed six months

Light offenses two months (Article 90, Revised Penal Code)

Prescriptive Period for Penalties

a. Death and reclusion perpetua twenty years

b. Other afflictive penalties fifteen years

c. Correctional penalties ten years except those punishable by arresto


mayor which shall prescribe in five years.

d. Light penalties one year (Article 92, Revised Penal Code)

Civil Liability

Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. The civil liability
of an offender includes: (a) Restitution; (b) Reparation of the damage caused; (c)
Indemnification for consequential damages. (Articles 100 and 104, Revised Penal
Code)

Restitution of the thing itself must be made whenever possible even when
found in the possession of a third person except when acquired by such person in
any manner and under the requirements which, by law, bar an action for its
recovery.

Reparation will be ordered by the court if restitution is not possible. The court
shall determine the amount of damage, taking into consideration the price of the
thing, whenever possible, and its special sentimental value.

Indemnification for consequential damages includes not only those caused


the injured party, but also, those suffered by his family or by a third person by
reason of the crime.
Except in case of extinction of the civil liability of the offender he shall
continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from the crime
committed by him, notwithstanding the fact that he has served his sentence
consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not been required to serve
the same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence or any other
reason. (Article 113, Revised Penal Code)

Dual Character of a Crime

A crime has a dual character: (1) as an offense against the State because of
the disturbance of the social order; and, (2) as an offense against the private person
injured by the crime unless it involves the crime of treason, rebellion, espionage,
contempt and others (wherein no civil liability arises on the part of the offender
either because there are no damages to be compensated or there is no private
offended party injured by the crime) (Nuguid vs. Nicdao, G.R. No. 150785, 15
September 2006)

Effect of Acquittal and Dismissal of the Case

The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil
unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the fact
from which the civil liability might arise did not exist.

The dismissal of the information or the criminal action does not affect the
right of the offended party to institute or continue the civil action already instituted
arising from the offense, because such dismissal or extinction of the penal action
does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action (Dayap vs. Sendiong, G.R. No.
177960, 29 January 2009).

You might also like