You are on page 1of 7

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

Rules
As compared to other circumstance- the prosecution has the burden of proving this circumstance
The circumstance must be alleged in the information, ( if not alleged it cannot be appreciated
even though it is proven by the accused.)-
Must be established by the prosecution by proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Ratio :Consti
Provision : grants every person charged with the offense the right to be informed of the offense
charged against him.)

Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances


1. Generic/ Ordinary Circumstances- (Generally appreciated in all crimes: ex recidivism,
reiteration par 10)- capable of being offset by MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES. If not
offset by ANY mitigating circumstance the imposable penalty would be – maximum
period presecribed by law
2. Qualifying Circumstances- change the nature of the offense : examples, treachery,
evident pre-meditation , abuse of superior strength , cruelty and several others.
(HOMICIDE- MURDER) CANNOT BE OFFSET BY ANY MITIGATING
CIRCUMSNTACE. If proven the offender may be penalized in accordance to the penalty
as prescribed by law .
EXAMPLE ; if quali circumstance appreciated from homicide to murder.
3. Specific Circumstances- Appreciated only in certain crimes ( disregard of the respect
due to the offended party on account of his rank, age and sex- appreciated only in crimes
against persons and crimes against honor , cruelty, treachery, abuse of superior strength-
crimes against persons )
4. Inherent Aggravating Circumstance- those that are included in the elements of the
felony, those that are crimes in themselves. ( by means of fire- inherent in the crime of
arson this cannot be appreciated without the offender using fire, dwelling- unlawful entry,
or breaking of floor roof, door- inherent in the crime of qualified trespass and robbery
with force upon things, trespass to dwelling, robbery force upon things- cannot be
committed without the offender using the circumstance abouve.)
5. Special Aggravating Circumstance- not found under art 14 of the RPC, are those that
arise under special conditions ( such as quasi recidivism and complex crimes) not
succeptible to being offset any mitigating circumstance – under the influence of the
dangerous drug- such circumstance art 25 ra 9165)

If the offender has committed a crime in advantage of his public position


Requisites:
1. A public officer or an employee
2. Uses his power prestige and accendancy or influence in the commission of the crime
which his office gives him ( his public position facilitated the commission of the
crime)
3. INHERENT IN SOME CRIMES- Falsification committed by public officer,
employees,- abuse of public position is inherent therein – not aggravating
That the offender must have committed a crime in contempt of or in insult to public
authorities
Elements :
1. The offender must have committed a crime
2. He committed a crime in the presence of the authority “ persons in authority as well as
agent of persons in authority “
3. That the offender must know that the public authorithy is a pub authority
4. The presence of the public authority did not deter the party in committing a crime
5. That the crime must have not been committed against public authority
The personal circumstance of the offender necessarily show his greater perversity, there is a
disrespect against public authority when the offender committed the crime in his presence
2 Generic Aggravating (par 3)
1. Offender committed a crime in disregard or without regard to the respect due to the
offended party on account of his rank age and sex.
Rank age and sex- not in itself aggravating , the prosecution must show that the offender
deliberately offends the same.
“AGE”- necessary that there is a great discrepancy in the age of the offender and the
offended party.- it must be shown that there is a deliberate intention to offend the
offended party
“RANK”- The offended party must occupy a position in gov, society, private entity that
the offender.
“SEX” the offended party must be a WOMAN (inherent in the crime of paricide,
qualified seduction, forcible abduction and consented abduction). SEDUCITION AND
ABDUCTION- The offended party is a WOMAN
2. Not committed a crime in the dwelling of the offended party. –the commission of the
crime in the dweilling of the offended party shows greater perversity. (inside the
dwelling of the offended party, outside the dwelling of the offended party then was
consummated inside the dwelling of the offended party. “ crime started outside,
continued inside and was consummated outside- still AGGRAVATING)
- IF ANY OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME TRANSPIRED IN THE DWELLING
OF THE OFFENDED PARTY, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT STARTED OR
ENDED. DWELLING IS APPRECIATED .- GENERAL RULE.
- EXEMPTION:
- 1)Dwelling may not be appreciated if the offended party has given provocation.
- 2) The provocation must be sufficient
- 3)Must have immediately preceded the act
- 4) dwelling – used for dwelling or for rest – canmot be used as residential ( people vs
tadio)
Accused went to the video rental store and raped the woman there- dwelling is not
appreciated therein because place is for residential and commercial purpose
- Not appreciated if both the offender and offended party resides in the same house.
4) ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
-Offended party must have imposed some trust and confidence upon the offender and that the
offender in committing the crime, must have abused such trust ( abuse must be grave and such
trust must have facilitated the commission of the crime)
Inherent in 1. Theft, 2. Estafa

5) That the crime is committed in the palace of the chief executive, or in his presence, or in
a place where public officers are engaged in the discharge of their function or in a place of
religious worship.
1. Palace of the chief executive- chief executive need not be in the palace
2. Committed in the presence in the chief executive- not necessarily be committed in the palace ,
it can be appreciated even if the chief executive is somewhere else
3. Religious worship- not necessarily that ceremony is happening
4. Place where public officer engaged in discharge of duty- look at the place
“OFFENDED party may or may not be the public authority himself.” VS contempt of or with
insult to public authorities wherein the offended party must not be the public authority .
If the offender has committed a crime with a plan of committing a crime in any of these places.
6) that the crime be committed during nigh time, or by a band, uninhabited place
Ratio : for any of these circumstances to be appreciated it is necessary that the offender has taken
advantage of any of these circumstances in the commission of the crime, any of these
circumstances has facilitated the commission of the crime.
NIGHTIME- the crime must have been committed between dusk and dawn , and must be
committed under the cover of darkness. ( the place must not be fully lit)
BAND- the crime is committed by at least 4 armed malefactors
UNINHABITED PLACE- a place wherein offended party may not receive any aid when the
commission of the crime is committed by the offender
7) AID OF ARMED MEN
AID OF ARMED MEN- these armed men aiding the offender are mere accomplices only they
are not principals
BAND- at least 4 armed malefactors , they should be treated as principals
8) if the offender has committed a crime on the occasion of an earthquake, conflagration,
shipwreck other calamity
Ratio : The offender instead of lending aide to the victims takes advantage of the their position
by committing a crime against them.
PAR 9-10 (REPETITIONS)
REITERATION- the offender must have previously been punished by a crime which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty or 2 or more crimes which the law attaches a lighter penalty.(
the first and subsequent offense NEED NOT BE EMBRACED UNDER THE SAME TITLE
OF THIS CODE).- CARRIES A GREATER OR AN EQUAL PENALTY OR TWO OR
MORE offenses LIGHTER PENALTY- (the offender must have served his sentence, must
have previously punished).
DISCRETIONARY UPON THE JUDGE- APPRECIATION
RECIDIVISM-a generic aggravating circumstance, previously convicted by final judgment of a
crime and who would again commit a crime and would undergo trial again and who would be
convicted for this new crime. ( the previous offenses and the crime he is now convicted must be
embraced under the same title of the code.) *Enough that the accused is convicted final
judgment need not need to serve his sentence.
ALWAYS AN AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
1995, the offender prosecuted serious physical injury convicted by final judgment
20 years later, the offender is convicted for homicide, then it can be appreciated. ( serious
physical injury and homicide embranced in the same title of this code, crimes against persons)
TRESSPASS TO DWELLING VS ROBBERY – (CRIMES NOT EMBRANCED UNDER
SAME TITLE OF THE CODE CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY VS CRIMES AGAINST
LIBERTY AND SECURITY)
HABITUAL DELINQUENCY- one who within the period of 10 years from his last date of
release or conviction would again be convicted of any of the ff crimes a third time or offener :
(estafa, swindling, robbery, less serious physical injuries, and falsification.)
QUASI RECIDIVISM- People vs Palaganas- special aggravating circumstance, one who was
convicted by final judgment of a crime and while he was serving his sentence , or while he was
about to start his sentence would commit a crime punishable under the revised penal code.
If convicted of crime while serving sentence- penalty prescribed for the offense in its max period
11) In consideration of PRICE, REWARD AND PROMISE
QUALIFYING- MURDER – the person must have offered a price to someone and that the
person who has offered thereof has committed the crime
-Appreciated both the offerror and the one who received the same in consideration of the crime
- The offer or the reward must be the DETERMINING CAUSE of the reason why the crime is
committed
-there should be no personal vendetta in committing a crime
12) FIRE, STRANDING OF A VESSEL ET AL .
“FIRE”- QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE IN MURDER- The offender must have the
intention of killing the victim by means of fire. ( if the intention is to burn only but someone dies
as a result, liable for PD 1613)
Ex. A Thought of killing Mr b. so Mr. A gone to the house of Mr B and set that house on fire
believing that Mr. B is inside the house, Mr b DIED .
Ruling : There is intention of using the crime of fire to kill mr b – murder by means of fire
There is no intention of using fire, only burn the house- liable for PD 1613 ( maximum
penalty of arson.)
“EXPLOTION” – Murder qualifying circumstance of murder- ( grenande or dynamite killing
one using these objects)”
“Inundation”- Murder anyone who will kill another by drowning him
“Derailment of a locomotive, stranding of a vessel , other artifice involving great waste or ruin”
- GREAT WASTE OR RUIN- A intends to Kill B, B resides alone, One afternoon a
PLANTED dynamite on the first floor of the building, as a result the building
crumbled Mr b was killed- Mr a IS LIABLE for murder for using an artifice of great
waste and ruin.
13) EVIDENT PREMEDITATION-
- deliberate planning. The offender must have planned the commission of the crime – inherent in
the crimes of robbery, theft, acts of lasciviousness and rape.
- THE prosecution must prove the ff : time the offender conceived the plan to commit the crime,
acts manifestly indicating that the offender has clung to his determination to committed crime,
the lapse of time.
Jurisprudence :
Not appreciated if – the intended victim is not the actual victim
Presumed- if the prosecution will be able to prove express conspiracy, if there is direct evidence
clearly showing that there is an agreement evident pre meditation may be presumed- established
if prosecution implied conspiracy
14) Craft, fraud, etc.
People vs Feliciano “ Disguise”- several members of the fraternity, had planned to kill one of the
member of the member fraternity and armed themselves with baseball clubs ski mask and
bonnets approached the victim and clubbed him to death- disguise was appreciated as
aggravating. When the offender worn these bonnets or ski mask they have the intention of
concealing their identity a form of disguise
15) Abuse of superior strength
Inherent in crimes against persons
Mere superiority in strength, weapon , number of the offender are not authomatic indications of
the presence of this aggravating circumstance
If the superiority is merely incidental, such circumstance is not appreciable
For this to be appreciated, the accused must have taken advantage of such superiority in the
commission of the crime
16) TREACHERY
Abuse of superior strength and treachery CANNOT EXIST.
ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STREGTH IS ALWAYS ABSOLVED IN TREACHERY
Specific Aggravating circumstance- only appreciated crimes against persons , ( sc ruled in
robbery with homicide – a crime against property- sc appreciated the same)
What was the reason of treachery appreciated in crime other than those crimes against persons?
1. People vs Ancheta SC RULED although robbery with homicide, a crime against
property, the law looks at treachery as a constitutent crime of homicide and not a
constituent crime of robbery
ESSENCE
-The offender must have attacked the victim suddenly, swiftly, and unexpectedly
-HEATED ARGUMENT- prior to killing, no treachery. One must expect that the person he is
having an argument with might attack him thus placing the victim on guard making the attack
not unexpected
- the offended party must not have given provocation- however slight the provocation therewith
For treachery to be appreciated, the offender must have deliberately and consciously adapted
means of attack to ensure the execution of the crime. ( CANNOT BE APPRECIATED IN SPUR
OF THE MOMENT CRIMES, meeting must not be by chance or incidental- if the meeting is
casual , it may not be said that the offender deliberately adapoted the means of attack)
PEOPLE VS TEEHANKEE
3 teens had gone barhopping 2 male and one female, at dawn they decided to go home, all the
trio boarded a car accompanied lady to his house told her friends to drop her a block away, while
walkimg she was accompanied by a male person, while walkmg path blocked by another car, the
accused stepped out asked for identification documents of the 2. Confrontation was seen by the
other man, accused shot the man in the chest. Woman got hysterical, accused asked the woman
and companion to sit on the gutter both were shot in the head. ( Accused 3 counts of crimes, 2
for murder and 1 for frustrated murder).
SC- the meeting of the offender and the victim was casual – there is no treachery (1st shot)
Killing of the 2 persons – ( why not appreciated even by chance meeting?) there was an
interregnum initial meeting till the time they were shot by the accused. ( time interval offender
thought of the means that would insure the execution of the crime or the offense).
MAY TREACHERY BE APPRECIATED IN THE CRIME OF SLIGHT PHYSICAL
INJURIES?- Not only a quali aggravating circumstance in murder , but also aggravating in
physical injuries. These forms of injuries are crimes against persons.
17) IGNOMINY
IGNOMINY VS CRUELTY
IGNOMINY- A generic aggravating circumstance, involve moral suffering.
Generally appreciable in crimes against chastitiy.
CRUELY- may be a generic or qualifying circumstance of murder, involve physical suffering
APPRECIATED ONLY IN CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS.
- Prosecution must prove that the offender must have done acts to prolong the suffering
of the victim
- Prove that the offender delighted that the victim suffered more before inflicting a
mortal wound
18) UNLAWFUL ENTRY
- Entered through the window
- entrance is not effected for that purpose.
- DWELLING AND UNLAWFUL ENTRY- Only one of the aggravating circumstance is
appreciated
20) AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YRS OF AGE, ETC
“MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLE”- the offender must have used a motor vehicle to facilitate
the commission of the crime( Escaping or going to.). “ by means of motor vehicle” – if the
offender kills the victim by running over him using a motor vehicle”- how the sc interpreted the
same in some cases.

You might also like