Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D.

Arancana
Criminal Law 1

CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABLITY

- Collectively known as attending
circumstances

1. Justifying Circumstances
2. Exempting Circumstances
3. Mitigating Circumstances
4. Aggravating Circumstances
5. Alternative Circumstances

Other Circumstances or Factors Which Affect Criminal Liability

1. Absolutory Cause – the effect is to absolve an offender from criminal liability, although not from
civil liability (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 85)
2. Extenuating Circumstances – the effect is to mitigate the criminal liability of the offender and
has the same effect as mitigating circumstances
- Examples:
1.) The crime of adultery committed by a married woman
abandoned by her husband
2.) Concealment of dishonor in the crime of infanticide insofar as
the mother and maternal grandparents are concerned
Concepts

1. Imputability – the quality by which an act may be ascribed to be a person as its author or owner.
It implies that the act committed has been freely and consciously done and may, therefore, be
put down to the doer as his very own
- Implies that a deed may be imputed to a person
2. Responsibility – the obligation of suffering the consequences of a crime. It is the obligation to
suffer the penal and civil consequences of a crime
- Implies that a person must take the consequence of such a deed
3. Guilt – an element of responsibility to make a man responsible for his own crime, for a man
cannot be made to answer for the consequences of a crime unless he is guilty

Article 11. Justifying Circumstances

1. Self-Defense
 Battered Woman Syndrome (RA 9262)
2. Defense of Relatives
3. Defense of Stranger
4. Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury
5. Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of Right or Office
6. Obedience to an Issued Order by a Superior for Some Lawful Purpose

Justifying Circumstances – those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law, so
that; thus there he is free from criminal liability and civil liability (except in Paragraph 4, Article 11,
Revised Penal Code); thus, there is no crime and there is no criminal

- Both admission and avoidance – the moment the accused invokes

any acts amounting to justifying circumstance, he is in effect
admitting the commission of the act but he is avoiding criminal
liability.
- Basis: lack of criminal intent
- Burden of Proof: Upon the accused who must prove it by clear and
convincing evidence and must not rely in the weakness of the
prosecution

Paragraph 1 (Self-Defense). Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights

Self-Defense – defense against assault of the person or body and his rights which are protected
by law

“Stand ground when in the right” – the law does not require a person to
retreat when his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly weapon
(Case: U.S. v. Domen)
 Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D. Arancana
Criminal Law 1

A. Rights Included in Self-Defense

1. Defense of Person
2. Defense of Rights Protected by Law
3. Defense of Property
- Article 429, Civil Code of the Philippines
- it can be invoked if there is an attack upon the property although it is not coupled
with an attack upon the person of the owner of the premises, as long as all the
elements for justification must however be present
Case: People v. Narvaez
- defense of property is not of such importance as the right to life and defense of
property can only be invoked when it is coupled with some form of attack on the
person of one entrusted with said property
4. Defense of Chastity/Honor
- a slap on the face is considered as unlawful aggression since the face represents a
person and his dignity. It means disregard to a person’s personality and a threat to
a person’s dignity, rights, and safety
Case: Rugas v. People

B. Reasons Why Penal Law Makes Self-Defense Lawful

1. It is based on the impulse of self-preservation as part of a person’s nature as human being
2. Classicists: grounded on the impossibility of the State to protect all person from unlawful
attack
3. Positivists: lawful defense is an exercise of right and an act of social justice

C. Retaliation vs. Self-Defense

Retaliation – the aggression that was begun by the injured party already ceased to
exist when the accused attacked him
- not a self-defense nor a justifying circumstance (when an unlawful
aggression ceases, the right to defend himself also ceases)
- Illustration: Person A made slight physical injuries to Person B without the
intention to inflict other injuries. Person B then attacked Person A.

Self-Defense – the aggression was still existing when the aggressor was injured or
disabled by the person making a defense
- Person A is about to strike Person B with fist blows. Person B stabs him
to repel the blows. If the knife is a reasonable means, there is self-
defense

D. Requisites of Self-Defense
1. Unlawful Aggression
2. Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed to Repel It
3. Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the Part of the Person Defending Himself

Note: If one requisite is missing, given the first requisite is met, it is considered as
incomplete self-defense and can only be considered as a mitigating circumstance

Unlawful Aggression – assault, attack, or threat in an immediate and imminent matter

must first take place
Case: People v. Yuman
- there is an unlawful aggression when the peril to one’s life
and peril to one’s limb is either actual or imminent

Peril to One’s Limb – peril to the safety of one’s person

from physical injuries

a. Actual – danger must be present, that is actually in

existence
Case: US v. Jose Laurel
b. Imminent – danger is on the point of happening
- Not required that the attack already
happened for it may be too late
- Case: People v. Cabungcal
- an indispensable requirement
 must first exist before the other two requisites
are considered; without unlawful aggression,
the second requisite of defense will have no
basis
 Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D. Arancana
Criminal Law 1

- Two Kinds of Aggression

a. Lawful Aggression – an aggression caused by the
fulfillment of one’s duty or exercise of a right
- Example: an act of a chief of
police who used violence by
throwing stones at the accused
when the latter was running away
from him to escape arrest, given
that the intent of the police is to
capture the accused
- Case: People v. Gayrama
b. Unlawful Aggression – there must be actual physical
force or actual use of weapon
- must be offensive and
positively strong to show
wrongful intent to cause an
injury
 Thus, a mere push or
shove, not followed by
other acts, is not an
unlawful aggression
- cannot be justified through
threatening or intimidating
attitude or even oral threats
 Aggression must be
real and not imaginary;
however, aggression
that is expected is real,
provided that it is
imminent

Notes on Unlawful Aggression

1. The attack made by the deceased and the killing of the deceased by
defendant should succeed each other without appreciable interval of time;
they must be done simultaneously
2. Accused must have no time nor occasion for deliberation and cool
thinking
3. It must come from the person who was attacked by the accused, directly or
impliedly
- When the author of the unlawful aggression is unknown, one cannot
invoke self-defense
4. There is no unlawful aggression when there was an agreement to fight
- Exception: Aggression occurred before the stipulated time and place
in agreement
- Illustration: Peron A and Person B agreed to fight outside the building.
However, Person A grabbed the neck and collar of the polo shirt of
Person B which was torn. Aggression made by Person A before they
could go out of the building is unlawful.
5. When the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression ceases to exist
- Exception: When the retreat is to take a more advantageous position
6. Mere belief of an impending attack is not sufficient
- Case: U.S. v. Guy-sayco
7. If the accused refused to give a statement to the policeman when he
surrendered, it is inconsistent with the plea of self-defense
8. One who voluntarily joined a fight cannot claim self-defense
- Case: Rugas v. People

How to Determine the Unlawful Aggressor in the Absence of Direct

Evidence
1. The person who was deeply offended by an insult and believed he had the
right to demand explanation but was not satisfied by the given explanation;
thus, striking the first blow
- Case: U.S. v. Laurel
2. The accused, having greater motive to commit the crime, after being publicly
humiliated
- Case: People v. Berio
 Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D. Arancana
Criminal Law 1

Kinds of Self-Defense
1. Self-Defense of Chastity – there must be an attempt to rape a victim
2. Defense of Property – Article 429, Civil Code of the Philippines
- must be coupled with an attack on the person of the
owner, or on one entrusted with such property
- Case: People v. Narvaez
- Defense of Home
 A man’s house is his castle; thus, he has the
right to protect it and those within it from
intrusion or attack
 The owner of the house need not to wait for
a blow before repelling the aggression if the
person enters the house at nighttime, armed
with bolo and forced his way into the house
(Case: People v. Mirabiles)
- In case of robbery, as long as a person is assaulted
under the cover of darkness is an unlawful
aggression
3. Self-Defense in Libel – justified when the libel is aimed at a person’s good
name

4. Defense of Dignity and of Person – slap on the face

- Case: People v. Sabio

Test in Determining Self-Defense

It is always objective; however, it can be subjective (the perception of
danger), provided that the accused believed it to be a real threat
- Illustration: When defendant believed that a real gun was being
aimed at him, even when it is a toy pistol (Case: People v. Boral)

Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed – the reasonableness of either or both

such necessity depends on the existence of unlawful aggression
and upon the nature and extent of the aggression
- entails rational equivalence (proportionate) to the unlawful
aggression and not perfect equality

Prevent – for imminent unlawful aggression

Repel – for actual unlawful aggression

Two Elements of Necessity

1. Necessity of the course of action taken which depends on the existence of
unlawful aggression
- The totality of the circumstances must also be considered
a. Darkness
b. In an uninhabited place
c. Done by surprise
d. Time
e. Physique of the aggressor
- there is no necessity when the danger or unlawful aggression
ceases to exist
 Example: Disproportionate resistance – multiple
stabbing of an offender who is completely disarmed
2. Necessity of the means used which must be rationally necessary to prevent
or repel an unlawful aggression
- In repelling or preventing the unlawful aggression, the one
defending himself must aim at his assailant, and not
indiscriminately fire his deadline weapon
- In cases of Peace Officer: In the performance of his duty, the
peace officer is required to overcome his opponent and is not
required to afford a person attacking him the opportunity for
fair and equal struggle. (In cases of private individual, self-
defense allows him to repel or prevent an unlawful
aggression)

Factors to Consider the Reasonableness of the Means Used

1. Presence of imminent danger
2. Impelled by the instinct of self-preservation
 Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D. Arancana
Criminal Law 1

3. Nature and quality of the weapon used by the accused compared to the
weapon of the aggression
a. No other available means or weapon to prevent or repel the unlawful
aggression
b. When there are other means, the circumstance does not allow one to
think coolly
4. Emergency to which the person defending himself has been exposed to
5. Size and/or physical character of the aggressor compared to the accused
and other circumstances that can be considered showing disparity between
the aggressor and accused. Rational Equivalence is enough.

Cases When There was No Rational Necessity of the Means Used

1. Killing with a knife a person who woke a woman, grasping her hand, when
there are no other acts to prove that it was an attempt to rape her.
2. When attacked by fist blows but uses a dagger and inflicted a mortal wound
to repel.
3. A man was killed by a woman after he placed his hand on her thigh in a well-
lighted chapel with many people

Note: the first two requisites are common to self-defense, defense of a relative,
and defense of a stranger

Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the Part of the Person Defending Himself

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

capably of exciting, inciting, or irritating anyone
- it is sufficient when it is adequate to steer one to its
commission and it is proportionate to the act of aggression
- the exercise of a right cannot give rise to sufficient
provocation

Rationale: When the person defending himself from the attack by another
gave sufficient provocation to the latter, the former is also to be blamed for
giving cause for aggression

Cases When the Third Requisite is Present

1. No provocation at all was given to the aggressor by the person defending
himself
2. When, even if a provocation was given, it was not sufficient
3. When, even if the provocation was sufficient, it was not given by the
person defending himself
4. When the given provocation was not proximate or immediate to the act of
unlawful aggression

Instances When Provocation is Sufficient

1. When one challenges the deceased to come out of the house and
engage in a fist fight with him and prove he is a better man’
2. When one utters vulgar language to insult or impute another
3. When the accused tried to forcibly kiss the sister of the deceased

Instances When Provocation is Insufficient

1. Verbal argument is insufficient
2. Hurt of pride is insufficient

Battered Woman Syndrome – considered by law as an additional justifying

circumstance in which victim-survivors who are suffering from this do not
incur criminal and civil liability, despite the absence of any elements for
justifying circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal Code
- Section 26, Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children
Act of 2004 (R.A. 9262)
 Notes prepared by: Faith Hedda D. Arancana
Criminal Law 1

Battery – any act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman or her
child, resulting to physical and psychological or emotional
distress

Battered Woman – one who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful

physical or psychological behavior by a man, in order to coerce
her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her
rights
- Includes wives or women in any form of intimate
relationship with men

Battered Woman Syndrome – it is a scientifically defined pattern of

psychological and behavioral symptoms found
in women living in battering relationships as a
result of cumulative abuse

“Cycle of Violence” Has Three Phases

1. Tension building phase – characterized by minor battering that
could be verbal or slight physical abuse or another form of hostile
behavior and a woman usually responds through kind and nurturing
behavior to pacify the batterer
2. Acute battering incident – characterized by brutality,
destructiveness, and sometimes death where the woman has no
control
3. Tranquil, loving (or at least non-violent) phase – begins when the
acute battering incident ends, characterized by the couple’s
experience of profound relief and the batterer may show a tender
and nurturing behavior towards his partner

Note: the woman must prove all three (3) phases of the cycle and
must go through at least twice of the battering cycle

Four Characteristics of the Battered Wife Syndrome

1. The woman believes that the violence was her fault
2. She has an inability to place the responsibility for the violence
elsewhere
3. She fears for her life and/or her children’s life
4. She has an irrational belief that the abuser is omnipresent and
omniscient

Note: the existence of battered woman syndrome in a relationship does

not itself establish a legal right of a woman to kill her partner. Evidence
must still be considered in the context of self-defense.

Only a certified psychologist or psychiatrist can prove the existence of

the Battered Woman Syndrome in a woman who shall assist the Court