JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES If threaten you with the gun, you have no obligation to fight back just to avoid

committing the crime.

2. NO POSSIBILITY OF ESCAPING FROM THE

1.) Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights.
THREAT
If there’s a chance, so you are not covered.
a. unlawful aggression
3. THREAT MUST BE OF EQUAL AND GREATER
b. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent the
INJURY
aggression
It must be clear, concrete and not speculated. The threatened harm must be real
(not imaginary)
c. lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
himself.
6. MINORS
2.) Defense of relatives -
7.A person over 15 and under 18, unless he acted with discernment.
…Spouse, Ascendants, Descendants, Bros. & Sis
Relatives by affinity, with in same degree, Parents-in-law, Son-in-law, Bros.-
in-law, Relatives and THOSE in consanguinity within the fourth civil degree.
EFFECT OF EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE:
3.) Defense of strangers – Provided that 1st and 2nd elements of self defense are
Offender is exempt from crim. Lab.
present and that person defending be not induce by revenge, resentment or
With regards to civil lab.
other evil motive.
 Offender is CIVILLY liable
4.) Emergency rule (State of necessity)
1. imbecility/insanity
2. minority
5.) Any person who acts:
3. minority with discernment
4. compulsion of an irresistible force
6.) ANY PERSON WHO ACTS IN OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED
5. impulse of an uncontrollable fear
BY A SUPERIOR FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE
 Offender is EXEMPT from civil lab.
1. accident (circ 2)
2. lawful with insuperable cause(3)
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES 3. Other Exempting Circumstance

OTHER EXEMPTING:
1.) Those mentioned in preceding chapter, when all necessary requisite are
not attendant (to justify or exempt) 1. Art. 6
2. Art 7 - light felonies are punishable only when they are
2.) Offender is under 18 or over 70. consummated, except those committed against persons or property.
3. Art. 16 - Accessories not liable for light felonies
3.) Offender has no intention to commit a wrong as that committed. 4. Art. 20 - Accessory who is related to principal is exempt from
crim. Lab.
4.) Having acted upon an impulse so powerful of naturally to have produced 5. Instigation
passion and obfuscation. - Public officer/private detective involves an innocent person to
commit a crime
5.) Sufficient provocation or threat On part of offended party preceded the and would arrest him after.
act. - idea of committing crime came from policeman
6.) REVENGE

7.) Offender had to Voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
or his agent
Voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to presentation of
evidence for prosecution 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.

8.) Offender is Deaf and dumb, blind, otherwise suffering some physical
defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense or communication
with his fellow beings.
9.) Such illness of offender as would diminish the exercise of the will power of
offender without however depriving him of consciousness of his acts.
10.) Any other circumstance of a similar nature analogous to those
mentioned.
a qualifying or special aggravating that shall not be offset or compensated by a
mitigating circumstance. If not alleged in the information, however, but
proven during the trial, it is only appreciated as a generic aggravating
circumstance.
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public
authorities.
not only confined to persons in authorities but also to agents of persons in
authority (ex: PNP superintendent)

EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES
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 (treated as one)
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless he acted during a lucid interval.
Aggravating only in crimes against persons and honor, not against property
like Robbery with homicide.
2. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.
Teachers, professors, supervisors of public and duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities, as well as lawyers are persons in authority
3. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law when prevented by
only for purposes of direct assault and simple resistance, but not for purposes
some lawful and insuperable cause. (NO CIVIL LIABILITY)
of aggravating circumstances

or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has
4. Any person who acts under compulsion of irresistible force.
not given provocation.
5. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an
Grule: Dwelling is aggravating when it is the dwelling of the offended party.
equal/greater injury.
It should also not be the dwelling of the offender. If the dwelling is both that of
the offended party and the offender, dwelling is not aggravating.
In order to avail of 4 & 5:
Dwelling need not be owned by the offended party. It is enough that he used
1.NO POSSIBILITY OF DEFENDING HIMSELF FROM
the place for his peace of mind, rest, comfort and privacy,provided that the
THE THREAT
 offended party is considered a member of the family who owns the dwelling
and equally enjoys peace of mind, privacy and comfort.
Even a room in a hotel if rented as a dwelling, like what the salesmen do when
they are assigned in the provinces and they rent rooms, is considered a
dwelling. A room in a hotel or motel will be considered dwelling if it is used
with a certain degree of permanence, where the offended party seeks privacy,
rest, peace of mind and comfort.
If a young man brought a woman in a motel for a short time and there he was
killed, dwelling is not aggravating. A man was killed in the house of his
common law wife. Dwelling is aggravating in this case because the house was
provided by the man.if a man has so many wives and he gave them a places of
their own, each one is his own dwelling. If he is killed there, dwelling will be
aggravating, provided that he also stays there once in a while. When he is only
a visitor there, dwelling is not aggravating.
In the provinces where the comfort rooms are usually far from the house
proper, if the offended party while answering the call of nature is killed, then
dwelling is aggravating because the comfort room is a necessary dependency
of the house proper.
If the offended party was inside the house and the offender was outside and the
latter shot the former inside the house while he was still outside. Dwelling is
still aggravating even if the offender did not enter the house.
One-half of the house is used as a store and the other half is used for dwelling
but there is only one entrance. If the dwelling portion is attacked, dwelling is
not aggravating because whenever a store is open for business, it is a public
place and as such is not capable of being the subject of trespass. If the
dwelling portion is attacked where even if the store is open, there is another
separate entrance to the portion used for dwelling, the circumstance is
aggravating. However, in case the store is closed, dwelling is aggravating
since here, the store is not a public place as in the first case.
Dwelling is aggravating in robbery with homicide because the crime can be
committed without necessarily transgressing the sanctity of the home
4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious
ungratefulness.
Aggravating only when offended party is one who reposed the
confidence coz if offended party is not the one who reposed confidence, it is
merely betrayal trust.
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.
If all three are present, then there is 3 aggravating circumstances.
BAND: 4 atleast must be armed.
UNINHABITED PLACE: no possibility of help.
NIGHTTIME: there was darkness (no light) and it must begin and end at night
time.
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who
insure or afford impunity.
Person commits a crime since he has a back-up
9. That the accused is a recidivist.
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 this Code.
10. 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. (REITERACION)
11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or
promise.
aggravates only the criminal liability of the person who committed the crime in
consideration of the price, promise, or reward but not the criminal liability of
the person who gave the price, reward or consideration
12. 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.
FIRE:
Fire is not aggravating in the crime of arson.
Whenever a killing is done with the use of fire, as when to kill someone, you
burn down his house while the latter is inside, this is murder.
There is no such crime as murder with arson or arson with homicide. The
crime committed is only murder.
If the victim is already dead and the house is burned, the crime is arson. It is
either arson or murder.
If the intent is to destroy property, the crime is arson even if someone dies as a
consequence. If the intent is to kill, there is murder even if the house is burned
in the process.
POISON:
Suppose husband kills wife by poisoning her and use of poison was alleged in
info, is it aggravating? Yes, it is parricide and qualifying circumstances is not
poison but relationship.
13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation.
For evident premeditation to be aggravating, the following conditions must
concur:
(1)The time when the accused determined to commit the crime;
(2)An act manifestly indicating that the accused 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 shall not be considered when the crime refers to a
different person other than the person premeditated against (ERROR IN
PERSONAE).
But if the person intends to shot amock (anyone he sees on sight), then that’s
evident premeditation .
14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to
weaken the defense.
16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the
person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which
tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself
arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
Offended party must not be able to put up a defense coz if he could defend, its
not treachery but it is now aggravated by “means employed to weaken the
defense”.
Treachery must be proven because if not ,it is only homicide not murder.
Treachery not appreciated where quarrel and heated discussion preceded a
killing, because the victim would be put on guard (People v. Gupo). But
although a quarrel preceded the killing where the victim was atop a coconut
 tree, treachery was considered as the victim was not in a position to defend All kinds of Aggravating must be STATED, ALLEGED AND PROVE during
himself trial to be appreciated, if 1 is lacking it will not be appreciated at all.

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

ignominy to the natural effects of the act.

Cruelty and ignominy are circumstances brought about which are not necessary
in the commission of the crime.

Ignominy refers to the moral effect of a crime and it pertains to the moral
order, whether or not the victim is dead or alive.
Raping a woman from behind is ignominous because this is not the usual
intercourse, it is something which offends the moral of the offended woman.

Cruelty pertains to physical suffering of the victim so the victim has to be alive
Cruelty is aggravating in rape where the offender tied the victim to a bed and
burnt her face with a lighted cigarette while raping her laughing all the way
(People v. Lucas, 181 SCRA 315) or when victim is made to suffer
unnecessary pain before he was killed. However, if victim is already dead
before the accused committed cruelty, then, that is not aggravating.

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

There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor,

door, or window be broken.

it is entry to other means aside from a door.

It is inherent in robbery w/ force upon things, and it is aggravating in robbery

with violence of persons.

19. 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.

Use in commission of an offense and not as a means of escape.

20. 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

1.Generic or those that can generally apply to all crime;

4blue 95: it is simply refer to as Aggravating Circumstance.

a.The circumstance can be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance;

b.It is not an ingredient of a crime. It only affects the penalty to be imposed but the
crime remains the same.

2.Specific or those that apply only to a particular crime;

Ex: treachery, it is applicable to crime against persons ,however, in robbery w/

homicide,since there is no such thing as robbery w/ murder, then treachery can
only be appreciated as generic only.

3.Qualifying or those that change the nature of the crime;

a. it either change the crime (homicide to murder)

b. or not change crime but increase penalty (like qualified theft where it
maximize penalty due to abuse of confidence)

Being an ingredient of the crime, it cannot be offset by any mitigating

circumstance; However, even if any of the qualifying circumstances under Article
248 on murder was proven, if that is not the circumstance alleged in the
information, it cannot qualify the crime. Let us say, what was alleged in the
information was treachery. During the trial, what was proven was the price,
reward or promise as a consideration for killing. The treachery was not proved.
Just the same, the accused cannot be convicted of murder because the
circumstance proven is not qualifying but merely generic. It is generic because it
is not alleged in the information at all.

4.Inherent or those that must of necessity accompany the commission of the

crime.