AGGRAVATING

CIRCUMSTANCES
(ART 14 OF THE RPC)

BY: CHELDY SYGACO ELUMBA-PABLEO,MPA,LLB

CRIMINAL LAW
 AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Shows greater perversity of the offender, hence they have the effect of
increasing the penalty.
4 KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. Generic aggravating
2. Qualifying circumstance
3. Special of specific aggravating circumstance
4. Inherent aggravating circumstance
 DISTINCTION BETWEEN MITIGATING AND
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

1a. Includes analogous circumstances-  Exclusive to the curtail discretion of

showing liberality of the law in favour of the judge to determine what other
the accused. circumstances may increase the
penalty.
2a. May lower the penalty by degrees (2A)  Increases penalty to the maximum

3a. A matter of defense which does not  Must be alleged in the information
alleged in the information. before they can be proved and
appreciated.
 EXAMPLE 2A
-inherent crimes are (homicide, murder,
alarm and scandal, grave threat) in this felony or offense
therefore aggravating.
• IF EQUAL PENALTY—both penalty will be carried.
• IF LOWER CRIMES—go to the penalty of loss firearm which is
higher.
• IF HIGHER– go to the lose firearm still
 I. GENERIC AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCES
• 1. Have the effect of the penalty being imposed in the
maximum period. (NOTE: that the penalty prescribed in Book
II maximum imposable, thus the increase in the penalty
cannot be to the next higher degree but only on the
maximum period.)
• 2. Apply to all felonies generally
• 3. Cannot be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance
 II. QUALIFYING
CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance.
2. Change of nature of the crime and the designation of the offense.
3. Must be alleged in the information otherwise cannot be considered as this will
violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature of the accusation
against him. (this is because qualifying circumstances changes the crime
committed besides the fact that it requires specification in the information.)
4. Must be proved as conclusively as the guilt of the offense because they are
elements of the offense.
 EXAMPLE # 4
– is penalized with reclusion temporal (20 years
maximum)
• With 1 qualifying circumstance, it becomes murder
penalized with reclusion perpetual (40 years maximum),
thus the penalty is doubted.
• Technically, it is not qualifying circumstance that increase
the penalty but the change in the crime committed.
 III. SPECIAL OR SPECIFIC
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
• Applies to a particular felony.
• They do not change the character of the offense
charged but guide the court in imposing the proper
penalty. (PP vs Agguihao)
• The same rule as in generic aggravating since both
do not change the character of the offense charged.
 IV. INHERENT AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE
• Requires that every complaint or information must expressly
and specifically allege not only the qualifying but also the
generic aggravating circumstance.
• RATIONALE: To inform the existence of qualifying
circumstance is for accused to prepare properly for his
defense to meet head0on the qualifying circumstance and
because such circumstance changes the nature of the charge
against him (PP vs Abuyen)
• The description of the offender in the information as
“uncle” is insufficient to inform the offender of the
charge as the law requires “affinity within third
degree of consanguinity”. He could be an uncle being
a cousin of the victim’s parent, outside the 3rd civil
degree. (PP vs Ranilla)
• is neither aggravating nor qualifying but is a manner
of incurring collective criminal liability among every
co-conspirator in an equal degree such that the act
of one becomes the act of all. The presence of
conspiracy cannot per se qualify a killing to murder.
(PP vs Feran)
 TAKING ADVANTAGE OF OFFICIAL
POSITION
“Did the accused abuse his office in order to commit
the crime?”—If “yes” then this circumstances is
present.(Sanchez vs Demetriou) It is considered present
when the offender falsifies a document in connection with
the duties of his office which consist of either making or
preparing or otherwise intervening in the preparation of a
document. (PP vs Layno)
 TAKING ADVANTAGE OF OFFICIAL
POSITION
• 2. The accused use his service firearm to shoot the
victim should not be considered as taking
advantage of public position. For such to be
considered aggravating, the public official must use
the influence, prestige, and ascendancy which his
office gives him in realizing his purpose. (PP vs
Amion)
 IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO
PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
• REQUISITES:
1.The public authority is engaged in the discharge of his duties
2.Offender knows the identity of the public authority
3.The crime was committed in his presence. (It must not be
against the person in authority for then the crime would be
direct assault and this circumstances will be absorbed being
inherent therein.)
 PUBLIC AUTHORITY
• Covers not only persons in authority but also agents of person in authority and
other public officers. (Rodriguez, 19 Phil. 150)
• PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS is now considered a person in authority (under CA 578
amending Art. 152)
• So is the :
1. Town Municipal Health Officer or a nurse
2. Municipal Councilors
3. Agent of the Bureau of Internal Revenue
 AGE, SEX, RANK AND DWELLING
• There must be PROOF that the offender deliberately intended to
offend or insult the of the offended. Thus circumstance
cannot co-exist with passion and obfuscation because here the
offender lost his control or reason.
—should be given a plain, ordinary meaning hence refers to high
social position or standing.
—includes dependencies, staircase and enclosures under
the house. Not necessarily the house be owned by the offended. It is
exclusively used for rest or comfort.
 ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE/OBVIOUS
UNGRATEFULNESS
• REQUISITES:
1. Offended had trusted the offender
2. Offender abused such trust
3. Such abuse of confidence facilitated commission of the crime

NOTE: the confidence between parties must be immediate and

personal.
 CRIME COMMITTED IN THE
FOLLOWING:
• Performance of function is not necessary in the
circumstances of the offense being committed in the:
1.Place of the Chief Executive
2.Place devoted to religious worship
3.Or in the presence of the Chief Executive
 NIGHT TIME (NOCTURNITY)

• Crime must be committed exclusively at night time

and not started at day time. It is not considered in
crimes where night time is mere accidental or
coincidental or has no influence in the perpetration
thereof.
 NIGHT TIME (NOCTURNITY)

• The crime must be covered with darkness. If the

light was bright enough to see what was going on
and recognize the assailants, nocturnity does not
qualify as an aggravating circumstance under either
the subjective or objective tests.
 UNINHABITED PLACE
(DISPUBLADO)

• Is determined by the reasonable possibility of

the victim receiving some help or where there
are no people or any number of houses within
the parameter of less than 200 meters.
 BAND
• Consist of more than 3 (at least 4) armed malefactors organized
with the intention of carrying out any unlawful design. They
should have acted together in the commission of the crime. (PP
vs Robiego)
• It is inherent in brigandage. It is similar to abuse of superior
strength whose essence is the utilization of the combined
strength of the assailants to overpower the victim to
consummate the offense.
 ARMED MEN
• ELEMENTS:
1.Armed men or persons took part in the commission
of the crime, directly or indirectly
2.The accused availed himself of their aid or relied
upon them when the crime was committed
 BAND ARMED MEN
1. There must be at least 4 armed men. 1. There is no required number of
malefactors.
2. The band members are all principals 2. The armed men who aided the
for they take part in the commission of principal offender are mere
the felony under the same plan and of accomplices for they give material and
the same purpose. moral aid and encouragement in the
commission of the crime.

3. Band absorbs aid of armed men.

 BAND ORGANIZED
CRIME
1. Requires at least 4 members 1. Requires only 2 members who
who are armed may or may not be armed

2. There is no particular crime for 2. Organized crime group is for

which the band is organized the purpose of committing
crimes for gain such as
kidnapping for ransom etc.
 4 HABITUALITY

1.Recidivism
2.Reiteracion (both Art. 14)
3.Habitual delinquency (Arty. 62, No. 5)
4.Quasi-Recividism (Art. 160)
 Recidivism

• It is an affirmative allegation whenever alleged in the

information and when the accused enters a plea of not
guilty to such information, there is a joinder of issues not
only as to his guilt or innocence but also as to the presence
or absence of the modifying circumstances so alleged. (PP
vs Molina)
 RECIVIDIST

• Is the 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 this Code.
• There must be 2 convictions.
• Judgment must before trial or at the time of filing or before
arraignment.
 REITERACION
• The offender has been previously punished (has served sentence).
• The first offense was punished with equal or greater penalty, or he
committed 2 or more crimes previously where he was meted lighter
penalty.

• RATIONALE: Despite the previous punishment, offender did not

learn his lesson.
 RECIVIDISM
1. Requires a previous conviction
by final judgment.
2. Offenses are under the same
title of the Code.
3. No requirement as to penalty
REITERACION
1. Requires service of sentence.
2. Is not so required
3. Prior crime must have been
imposed with penalty equal to or
greater than the 2nd crime or he
must served 2 or more crimes
carrying light penalty.
 HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
• Totally calls for a new penalty (2 penalty involved)
• Both involved conviction and release or service of sentence within 10 years.
(must be counted from the date of release for the 2nd crime if he had been
released again convicted)
• Is a special aggravating circumstance, unlike the other kids of aggravating
circumstances which merely increase the penalty for the offense committed.
• It has its own penalty which escalates with the increase in the number of
convictions. Thus the penalty is for the felony committed plus for the
habitual delinquency the total of which should not be more than 30 years.
 HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
• APPLIES ONLY TO:
1.Falsification
2.Robbery
3.Estafa
4.Theft
5.Serious and less serious physical injuries
 RECIDIVISM
1. A 2nd conviction is enough.
2. Requires the crime involved be
both under the same title of the
Code.
3. Does not prescribed because there
is no limit between the 1st and the 2nd
convictions.
4. Generic aggravating circumstance
which can be offset by an ordinary
mitigating circumstance.
HABITUAL
DELINQUENCY
1. A 3rd conviction is necessary
2. The crimes are specific which may
or may not be within the same title.
3. Prescribes in 10 year period is
exceeded.
3. Special aggravating circumstance
which must be considered by the
court in the imposition of penalty.
It cannot be offset.
 QUASI-RECIVIDISM
• The offender has been previously convicted by final judgment and before beginning to
serve such sentence, or while serving the same, he committed a felony.
• The effect is to penalize the convict with maximum period for the new felony
committed plus the penalty for the original conviction plus the felony for the habitual
delinquency.
• If:
1. In the service of the 1st conviction, he reached the age of 70, or
2. He shall complete the service of the original conviction after that age, he shall be
pardoned unless he is a habitual criminal or his conduct or other circumstances shows
that he is not worthy of pardon.
 PRICE, PROMISE OR REWARD
• Affects equally the offeror and the acceptor.
• The offeror is a principal by inducement, and the
acceptor is principal by direct participation.
• Inducement is the primary consideration in the
commission of the crime for this circumstance to be
aggravating.
 EVIDENT PREMEDITATION (COOLING
OFF PERIOD)
• The lapse of a period sufficient in a judicial sense to afford full
opportunity for meditation and reflection and sufficient to allow the
conscience of the actor to overcome the resolution of his will.

• It cannot be appreciated to qualify a killing to murder in the absence

of evidence, not only sufficient lapse of time, but also of the
planning and the preparation of killing when the plan was conceived.
(PP vs Nell)
 EVIDENT PREMEDITATION (COOLING
OFF PERIOD)
• ELEMENTS:
1. The TIME when the offender determined to commit a crime. (if the
act connected to the 2nd crime—”simultaneous”, no evident
premeditation)
2. An act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination
3. Sufficient LAPSE of time between such determination and execution
to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act.
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION (COOLING
OFF PERIOD)
• EXAMPLES:
1.It is not inherent in robbery with homicide. In such offense,
the evident premeditation must relate to the killing and
not to robbery. (PP vs Manansala)
2.If the attack upon the village is planned, the killing of any
individual during the attack is attended also by evident
premeditation.
 ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGHT
• It is intentionally employing excessive force out of proportion to
the means of defense available to the offended party. There
must be a notorious inequality of force between the victim and
the aggressor.
• Superiority in number does not necessarily mean that the
offender abused their superior strength or that it means are
employed to weaken the defense. It must be proved that the
attackers cooperated in such a way as to secure advantage from
superiority of strength.
 ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGHT
• Not taken into account if the assault was characterized by passion
and obfuscation or made during a quarrel. It is inherent in
parricide as generally, the husband is physically stronger than the
wife; and in rape it is absorbed in the element of force, hence
already taken in fixing the penalty.
• An attack by a man with a deadly weapon upon an unarmed and
defenceless woman constitutes abuse of superior strength which
his sex and weapon afforded him (PP vs Espina)
 TREACHERY (ALEVIOSA)

• ELEMENTS: (PP vs Magallanes)

1. Insure the offended was not able to put up any defense, not even token
defense
2. The means, manner, and form was consciously and deliberately choosen

NOTE: The means and methods or form of execution of the crime MUST be
consciously adopted because the law requires that the same insure its
execution.
 TREACHERY (ALEVIOSA)
• There is a preparation to commit a felony to ensure the
commission of the crime.
• No treachery if the offended party was able to prepare the attack.

ESSENCE:
• The swiftness and the unexpectedness of the attack upon the
unsuspecting and unarmed victim, who does not give the slightest
provocation. (PP vs Rebamontan)
 IGNOMINY AND CRUELTY

• CRUELTY- physically suffering and the victim is alive

• IGNOMINTY—pertains to the moral order which
adds disgrace and obloquy to the material injury
caused by the crime. It produces more suffering on
account of its humiliating aspects. (mental
suffering)
 IGNOMINY AND CRUELTY

• EXAMPLE:
1. The killing was done with cruelty, by deliberately or inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim or outraging or scoffing at his
person or corpse. No greater outrage, insult or abuse can a person
commit upon a corpse than to sever its head. The head represents the
dignity of a person and any violence directed towards it cannot be
interpreted in any other manner than outrage to his corpse. (PP vs
Binondo)
 UNLAWFUL ENTRY
• There is unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by way not
intended for that purpose.
• It must be entry not exit.
• But breaking of the door to enter is not unlawful entry since this is
covered by par. 19 of Art. 14 which states that: “ as means to
commission of the crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be
broken” showing that unlawful entry excludes ingress by means of
such breaking.
 AID OF MINOR, USE OF MOTOR
VEHICLE
• THESE ARE DISTINCT CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. With the aid of minor showing greater perversity of the offender in
educating a minor on how to commit a crime
2. The use by modern criminals of faster means of conveyance to commit
the crime. (what is aggravating is the use of motor vehicle to commit
the crime not to escape.)—it pose difficulty to the authorities in
apprehending them.

It is not aggravating if the vehicle was not used directly or indirectly to
facilitate the criminal act. --pedicab is not included (PP vs Amion)
THANK YOU FOR READING!

CHELDHAYE