PRINCESS HANADI Q.

SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1

ART. 11 – JUSTIFYING physical force or with a

CIRCUMSTANCES
I. CONCEPT
 Those which make the act of the
actor in accordance with law; he
incurs no criminal liability for
the consequences of his act.
 No crime, no criminal and civil
liability except in case of State
of necessity
II. DIFFERERENT JUSTIFYING
CIRCUMSTANCES
A. Defense of self
B. Of relatives
C. Of strangers
D. State of necessity
E. Fulfillment of duty
F. Obedience to superior officer
III. REQUISITES OF SELF-DEFENSE
A. Unlawful aggression
B. Reasonable necessity of the
means employed to prevent or VII.
repel it
C. Lack of sufficient provocation
on the part of the person
defending himself
 Includes defense of life, of VIII.
chastity, of property and of
honor (defense against
defamation)
IV. UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
 An offensive act that threatens a
person with danger to his life
and safety.
 Kinds:
A. Actual or material unlawful
aggression – an attack with
weapon, an offensive act that
positively determines the intent
of the aggressor to cause injury
B. Imminent unlawful aggression
– an attack that is impending or
at the point of happening, it
must not be mere threatening
but must be offensive and
positively strong
V. IMPORTANCE OF UNLAWFUL
AGGRESSION
 No unlawful aggression,
nothing to prevent or repel
 No self-defense unless unlawful
aggression is proven
VI. RULE WHEN AGGRESSION
CEASED TO EXIST
 When aggression ceased to
exist, there is no necessity for
self-defense.
WHAT REVEALS SELF-DEFENSE
OR INTENT TO KILL?
 The number, location and
nature of wounds
WHAT IS THE EFFECT ON THE
BURDEN OF PROOF IF ONE
INVOKES SELF-DEFENSE?
 The burden of proof is reversed
or is shifted to the accused for
he must prove clearly and
convincingly the elements of
self-defense.
IX. WHEN THERE IS REASONABLE
NECESSITY OF THE MEANS
EMPLOYED?
 PRINCESS HANADI Q. SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1

 Depends upon the immediate to the act of

circumstances surrounding the
aggression, the state of mind of
the aggressor and the available
weapon at the defender’s
disposal and also we take into
consideration the following:
A. Whether the aggressor is
armed
B. The nature and quality of
the weapon used
C. The physical conditions
and sizes of the
aggressor and the person
defending himself.
aggression.
XIII. RULES WHEN A PERSON IS
ATTACKED
A. Stand ground when in right –
applies if the person attacked is
a peace officer for he face the
trouble maker and prevent him
from committing disorderly acts
B. Retreat to the wall – assailed
person tends to retreat before he
meets the assault with force and
that upon reaching the wall, he
can now legally defend himself

X. RATIONAL EQUIVALENCE XIV. EFFECT WHEN NOT ALL

REQUISITES OF DEFENSE ARE
XI. PARAMOUNT CONSIDERATION PRESENT
IN DETERMINING THE  Accused is entitled to:
REASONABLE NECESSITY OF A. Ordinary mitigating
THE MEANS EMPLOYED circumstances of
 Self-preservation incomplete self-defense if
only one requisite is
XII. CONCEPT OF LACK OF present which should be
PROVOCATION ON THE PART unlawful aggression.
OF DEFENDER. B. Privileged mitigating
 Shows ther e is provocation but circumstances of
is not sufficient and it must not incomplete self-defense if
immediately precede the act. only two requisites are
 Requisites: present, one of which
A. No provocation at all was must be unlawful
given to the aggressor aggression.
B. There is provocation but is
not sufficient
C. Provocation is sufficient but
is not given by the person
defending himself
D. If given by the person
defending himself, it must
not be proximate and
 PRINCESS HANADI Q. SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1

XV. DEFENSE OF HONOR A. Unlawful aggression

B. Reasonable necessity of the
XVI. DEFENSE OF PROPERTY means employed
 It is proper but not to the extent C. The person defending is not
of taking the life of the induced by revenge, resentment
aggressor for the value of or other evil motives
property can never equal the
value of life. XX. ELEMENTS OF STATE OF
NECESSITY
XVII. WHO DETERMINES THE A. The evil sought to be avoided
EXISTENCE OF JUSTIFYING actually exist
CIRCUMSTANCES? B. The injury feared be greater
 The Court for matter of defense than that done to avoid it
requires litigation. C. There is no practical and less
harmful way of preventing it
XVIII. ELEMENTS OF DEFENSE OF
RELATIVES XXI. CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSON
A. Unlawful aggression ACTING UNDER STATE OF
B. Reasonable necessity of the NECESSITY
means employed  The act is legal and valid, thus
C. In case of provocation was the actor has no civil liability
given by the person attacked,
the person defending has no XXII. ELEMENTS OF FULFILLMENT
part therein. OF DUTY OR EXERCISE OF
 Who are relatives? RIGHT
1. Defender’s spouse A. The offender acted in
2. Ascendants performance of his lawful
3. Descendants exercise of right or office
4. Legitimate brothers or B. The injury cause or the offense
sisters committed is necessary
5. Natural brothers or consequences of the due
sisters performance of such right or
6. Adopted brothers or office
sister
7. By affinity to the same
degrees
8. By consanguinity within XXIII. ELEMENTS WHEN AN
fourth civil degree OBEDIENCE TO SUPERIOR
ORDER IS APPRECIATED
XIX. ELEMENTS OF DEFENSE OF A. An order is given by a superior
STRANGERS officer
PRINCESS HANADI Q. SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1

B. The order is for legal purpose

C. The means used to carry out
such order is lawful
 PRINCESS HANADI Q. SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1

ART. 12 – EXEMPTING  Emphasis is on the actor

CIRCUMSTANCES
V. DEFINITION OF INSANITY AND
I. ART. 80 – Execution of Principal THE RULE ON THE MENTAL
Penalties STATE OF A PERSON
 Repealed by PD 603, which is  Is a manifestation in language
modified by RA 9344 or conduct of disease or defect
of the brain, or a more or less
II. CONCEPT permanently diseased or
 Circumstances which by law disordered condition of the
exempts the offender from mentality, functional or organic,
liability although his act is characterized by perversion,
criminal. inhibition or disordered
 There is crime but no criminal function of the sensory or of the
liability, only civil liability intellective faculties or by
except in accident and impaired or disordered volition.
insuperable cause.  The rule is that it exists when
there is a complete deprivation
III. DIFFERENT EXEMPTING of intelligence and total
CIRCUMSTANCES deprivation of freedom of the
A. Imbecility or insanity will.
B. Minority as amended by RA
9344 VI. HOW IS INSANITY
C. Accident MANIFESTED?
D. Compulsion of irresistible force  Manifested in language and
E. Impulse of uncontrollable fear conduct
F. Insuperable or lawful cause
VII. HOW IS INSANITY DISPROVED?
IV. DISTINCTION OF JUSTIFYING A. Immediately after killing the
FROM EXEMPTING victims, the accused thought of
CIRCUMSTANCES surrendering himself to the PC
Justifying Detachment
 The act is legal B. He showed remorse during his
 No crime, no criminal confinement in the Mental
 No criminal and civil liabilities hospital
 Emphasis is on the act C. He was able to give a sworn
Exempting statement before the
 The act is criminal Prosecutor’s Office
 There is a crime and a criminal VIII. THE TESTS OR CRITERIA FOR
INSANITY
 No criminal liability but there is
a civil liability
 PRINCESS HANADI Q. SALIAN LLB 1B
CRIMINAL LAW 1
A. Cognition or the complete
deprivation of intelligence in XIV.
committing the criminal act
B. Volition or the complete
deprivation of freedom of the
will
IX. DEFINITION OF
SCHIZOPHRENIA AND ITS TO
EFFECT ON CRIMINAL
LIABILITY?
 Schizophrenia is a mental
disorder characterized by the
inability to distinguished
fantasy from reality.
 Mitigating circumstances
X. RULE WHEN INSANITY IS XVI.
INTERPOSED
 Allegations must be proved by
the one alleging. (Accused)
XI. WHEN SHOULD INSANITY
OCCUR TO BE EXEMPTING?
 Immediately before or the
precise moment of doing the act
XVII.
XII. RELATION OF ARTICLE 12(1) TO
ARTCILE 79
 Article 79 refers to insanity
occurring after the commission
of the crime while Article 12(1)
refers to that at the moment the
crime is being committed, the
former does not acquit the
accused but the latter does.
XIII. QUANTUM OF EVIDENCE TO
REQUIRED TO OVERTHROW
PRESUMPTION OF SANITY
 Proof beyond reasonable doubt
WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO
AN INSANE OR IMBECILE WHO
HAS COMMITTED A FELONY?
 Court shall order his
confinement in one of the
hospitals or asylums established
for person thus afflicted
XV. REQUIREMENT FOR IMBECILITY
TO BE ACCEPTED
 Same standard with insanity
that is the complete deprivation
of intelligence in committing
the act and total deprivation of
freedom of the will
EFFECT OF LACK OF REASON
AND FAILURE TO USE REASON
ON CRIMINAL LIABILITY
 Lack of reason (insanity)
exempts criminal liability but
failure to use reason or good
judgment due o=to extreme
anger (passion) does not.
CAN TRIAL COURT DETERMINE
WHETHER OR NOT AN
ACCUSED IS INSANE?
 No because the judge is not
equipped with the specialized
knowledge of determining the
state of a person’s mental
health.