1. What are the kinds of aggravating circumstances?

Explain each kind

and provide one (1) example. (5 pts)
Answer: There are five (5) kinds of aggravating circumstances:

1. Generic Aggravating: those that can generally apply to almost all

crimes. It increases the penalty of the offenses to its maximum period
but it cannot be to the next higher degree. It can be offset by an
ordinary mitigating circumstance.
example: Taking advantage of public position and etc.

2. Specific Aggravating: those which apply only to specific crimes

(cannot be offset by ordinary mitigating circumstance)
example: such as ignominy in crimes against chastity and cruelty and
treachery.

3. Qualifying Aggravating: those that change the nature of the crime.

(cannot be offset by ordinary mitigating circumstance)
example: Grave abuse of confidence which makes stealing as qualified
theft.

4. Inherent Aggravating: they are already elements in the commission

of the crime. Thus, they are no longer considered against the offender
so as to increase the imposable penalty. (cannot be offset by ordinary
mitigating circumstance)
example: Breaking of wall or unlawful entry into a house in robbery
with the use if force upon things.

5. Special Aggravating: those which arise under special conditions to

increase the penalty of the offense
example: Complex crimes

2. A murder was committed in the presence of a Patrolman Gustav.

He was present at the scene of the crime. He saw how the
accused entered the gate of the victim's house without the latter
noticing the former's presence. He saw how the accused
attacked the victim from behind with a machete while the latter
was facing away from the accused and watering his plants.
Right after the fatal blow, the accused escaped. (5 pts)

Questions:
 A. Can the aggravating circumstance of contempt of or insult to
public authorities be appreciated against the accused for
committing a crime in the presence of a policeman? Why or why
not?
Answer: No, Under the Revised Penal Code, only the Person in
authority not the "agent" of authority in the commission of the
crime is applicable in Paragraph 2 of Article 14. Here, Patrolman
Gustav is a policeman who serves as an agent of authority only.
Consequently, the aggravating circumstance of contempt of /or
insult to public authorities cannot be appreciated.

B. In the example given, is an attack from behind automatically

gives rise to treachery? Why or why not?
Answer: Yes, under The Revised Penal Code, paragraph 16,
Treachery (Alevosia) is when the offender in the time of attack,
the victim was not in a position to defend himself and
consciously adopted the particular means, method or form of
attack employed by him. Here, the offender employed the attack
from behind with machete while the latter was facing away right
after the fatal blow. Hence, Treachery can be appreciated in the
given example.

C. Before treachery can be considered, what elements should be

present?
Answer: There is treachery when the following elements are
present;
1. That the time of the attack, the victim was not in a
position to defend himself; and
2. That the offender consciously adopted the particular
means, method or form of attack employed by him.

3. A widowed septuagenarian had a quarrel with the accuse outside

the former's house because the latter had once again blocked
the gate. The widowed septuagenarian continued to mock the
accused by shouting foul words towards the latter and he even
dared the accused to come inside his house so the latter can kill
him. Upon hearing this, the accused bought two galloons of
gasoline, went back to the house of the widowed septuagenarian
 and burned the latter's house. The victim was burned beyond
recognition and her house of strong materials was burned to the
ground. An Information for Murder was filed against the accused
and it was alleged that the killing was attended with the
aggravating circumstances of disregard of age, sex and dwelling
of the offended party. (5 pts)

Questions:
A. May these three aggravating circumstances be considered
separately if they concur in the same case?
Answer: No. these three aggravating circumstances cannot be
considered separately even they concur in the same case
because if all/almost of the circumstances is present, they have
the weight of ONE aggravating circumstance only.

B. If you were the judge, how would you rule on these three
aggravating circumstances? Discuss each circumstance with
basis.
Answer: In the information, the killing was attended with the
aggravating circumstance of disregard of Age, sex and dwelling.
Here, AGE being appreciated because the offender is a
septuagenarian (70s) which is considered as within the “old age”.
On the other side of the coin. Sex and dwelling is not aggravating
because in Sex, though it pertains to a Female sex, there is no
manifestation of disrespect of its womanhood and in Dwelling,
the offended party have given a sufficient and immediate
provocation to the accused. If I were a judge, the aggravating
circumstance of disregard of age can only be appreciated in this
case.

4. Juan works as Pedro's personal driver. Pedro has a daughter,

Maria, who resides three blocks away from Pedro. Juan had been
in love with Maria for quite some time now. One night, Juan
surreptitiously entered Maria's house and raped the latter. An
Information for Rape was filed against Juan and it was alleged
that the rape was committed by him with abuse of confidence
since Maria was Pedro's daughter. (10 pts)

Questions:
A. What is the difference between abuse confidence and obvious
ungratefulness.
Answer: abuse of confidence is when the offended party has trusted
the offender who later abuses such trust by committing the crime
while obvious ungratefulness is when the ungratefulness must be of
such clear and manifest in gratitude on the part of the accused.

B. Should the aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence be

appreciated against Juan? Why or why not?
Answer: Yes, under the Revised penal code, obvious ungratefulness is
when the offended party had trusted the offender who later abuses
such trust by committing the crime. Here, Juan was trusted by Pedro
with confidence who happens to be his personal driver and raped his
daughter, Maria. Therefore, Abuse of confidence can be appreciated as
an aggravating circumstance.

Supposing, at the time of the rape, Maria was working as a servant at

the Palace of the Chief Executive. While sleeping in the quarters, Juan
entered her room and raped her there.

C. What aggravating circumstance/s is present in such case? Why or

why not? Give the elements.
Answer: The aggravating circumstance present is the commission of
the crime in the palace of the Chief Executive. Here, Juan raped Maria
that was executed within the Palace of the Chief Executive that is one
of the elements that manifest an aggravating circumstance.

5. Juan and Pedro had a long standing feud. Juan had been
contemplating of killing Pedro. He had already created a master
plan that he wrote on his diary three months prior. On the day of
Pedro's birthday, Juan disguised himself as a clown, with a full-
on make up. He entered Pedro's party, played the part, and
waited for 9:30 P.M. When Pedro was taking a pee inside the
bathroom, Juan followed him. The hacking of Pedro came like the
bolt of lightning at around 9:45 P.M. and without any warning.
Pedro tried to escape but Juan easily caught up with him as he
was too weak to run and too weak to defend himself. Without
 giving him any opportunity or means to repel the attack, Juan
held his head, collared him and cut off his head. (10 pts)

Questions:
A. What aggravating circumstance/s, are present in the example at
first glance?
Answer: At first glance, Night time can be considered because of
the indication of the time without considering its elements.The
aggravating circumstances present are Evident premeditation and
Disguise.

B. Provide for each element of the aggravating circumstance/s you

have identified.
Answer: In Evident Premeditation the elements are:
1. the time when the offender determined to commit the crime.
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his
determination
3. A sufficient laps of time between the determination and
execution.
In Disguise, the offender resort to any device to conceal his
identity.

C. Among the aggravating circumstance/s you were able to identify,

what should be appreciated against Juan? Why?
Answer: In the case provided, Evident premeditation is the most
applicable as an aggravating circumstance because the elements are
present and suited in the given situation.

6. A. Distinguish the aggravating circumstance of by a band under

par. 7 from aid of armed men under par. 8. (10 pts)
Answer: Band under Paragraph 7 it means that there are at least
4 armed malefactors acting together in the commission of the
offense while Armed Men under paragraph 8 at least 2 armed
malefactors and is present even if one of the offenders merely,
relied on their aid, actual aid is not necessary.

B. Give your own examples applying par.7 and par. 8.

Answer:
Band:
 A, B, C, D and E all armed with knives, killed X. The information stated that A, B, C, D and
E conspired with one another and as a band they committed the crime of murder against X.
during the presentation of evidence, conspiracy was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Likewise,
band as an aggravating circumstance was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Aid of Armed Men:

a criminal planning a bank heist and seeking the aid of armed men. The armed
individuals act as lookout and security, ensuring the successful execution of the robbery by
intimidating bank staff and customers with their weapons, thereby aiding in the commission of
the crime.

C. Distinguish recidivist under par. 9, reiteracion under par. 10 and

quasi-recidivist under Art. 160 of the RPC.
Answer: Recidivist is when the offender 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 the RPC
while Reiteration is when the offender has been previously punished for an offense which the
law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter
penalty. On the other hand, Quasi-Recidivism Any person who shall commit a felony after
having been convicted by final judgment before beginning to serve such sentence or while
serving such sentence shall be punished by the maximum period prescribed by law for the new
felony.

D. Give your own examples of a recidivist, habitual delinquent and

quasi-recidivist.
Answer:
Example of a recidivist: John, having previously served time for burglary, is arrested again for
breaking into another property.

Example of a habitual delinquent: Sarah, convicted multiple times for various theft offenses
over the years, demonstrates a consistent pattern of criminal behavior.

Example of a quasi-recidivist: Mike, arrested for shoplifting and awaiting trial, commits another
theft before the court resolves the first case.

7. What are the alternative circumstances and when are these

circumstances considered aggravating and mitigating? (5 pts)
Answer: The following are the alternative circumstances: 1. Relationship, 2.
Intoxication, 3. Degree of instruction and education of the offender.
Relationship is considered as mitigating in crimes against property.
 Relationship is aggravating if the crime committed by the offender who is of higher degree than
that of the offended party is serious physical injury

Intoxication is considered as a mitigating circumstance if it is not habitual or subsequent to the

plan to commit the felony

Intoxication is considered as an aggravating circumstance if it is habitual and it is done subsequent to

the commission of a crime.
A high degree of education is considered as an aggravating circumstance if the offended makes use of his high degree of
education in facilitating the commission of the crime.

8. A. What are the three kinds of principals? Give the elements. (5

pts)
Answer: There are Three Kinds of Principals:
1. Principal by Direct Participation
Elements:
a. They participated in the criminal resolution; and
b. They carried out the plan and personally took part in its execution by acts, which
directly tended to the same end.
2. Principal by Induction/Inducement
Elements:
1. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the
crime
2. That the inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material
executor.
3. Principal by Indispensable Cooperation
Elements:

1. Participated directly in the criminal resolution;

or
2. Cooperated in the commission of the crime by
performing an act, without

B. A married woman suggested to her paramour, with who she

had been maintaining illicit relations, kill her husband so they
can finally happily live together. The paramour concocted a
murder plan. He asked his buddy, the husband's trusted family
driver, to bring the husband at a designated time and place, to
which the latter agreed. Thereat, while the car was parked, the
paramour shot the husband on the head. What are the criminal
responsibilities of the married woman, the paramour, and the
family driver? Explain with basis.
Answer: The wife is the principal by inducement because she made with the
intention of procuring the commission of the crime. While the paramour is the principal by
direct participation because he was the one who shot the husband. On the other hand, the
family driver is the principal by indispensable cooperation because he perform of another act
which is indispensable to the accomplishment of the crime.

9. Maria had knowledge of and assented to Pedro's intention to

have sexual intercourse with her daughter. She forced XYZ to
drink beer, and when XYZ was already drunk, she left XYZ alone
with Pedro, with the knowledge and express consent to Pedro's
plan to have sexual intercourse with her daughter. (5 pts)

Questions:
A. Who is an accomplice? Give the elements.
The accomplice merely cooperate in the commission of the crime by previous of simultaneous
acts. The participation is only minor in character. It only provides material and moral aide in an
efficacious manner but not in an indispensable manner. If the act performed by the offender
facilitated the commission

These are the elements of Accomplice:

1. There must be a community of design;

2. That he performs the acts previous or simultaneous to the commission of the crime; and

3. That the acts performed by the principal

B. In the case given, is Maria an accomplice? Why or why not?

Answer;B. Yes. provided in the Revised penal code, accomplice
are those individual who know and agree with criminal design. In
the case provided, Maria has a knowledge of the intention of
Pedro to rape his daughter he also became an instrument for the
criminal offense. Hence, he is accomplice of the crime
committed.

10. In a bar, Pedro had an altercation with Juan. Pedro's companion,

Tisoy and Casoy, joined in and three of them took part in the
aggression that resulted in the death of Juan which happened
like this: Tisoy was holding Juan by the neck, choking him, Casoy
was holding Juan by the arms at the time Pedro fired the fatal
shot to Juan's head. (5 pts)
A. Prosecuted for Murder, Tisoy and Casoy presented evidence that
the altercation was a spur of the moment, that no conspiracy existed
between the three of them, hence, they should only be found guilty as
accomplices and not as principals. If you were the judge, will you
convict them as mere accomplices or principals? Why or why not.
Answer; A. Tisoy and Casoy will be convicted as accomplices.
provided in the RPC, accomplice are those who incurs criminal liability
by merely cooperating in the execution of the crime without
participating as a principal. In the case provided the acts of Tisoy and
Casoy has only relation between the acts done committed by Pedro
who is the principal of the committed crime. Therefore, if I were the
judge, I will convict Tisoy and Casoy as accomplices.

B. Distinguish conspirator from accomplice.

Accomplice Incurs criminal liability by merely cooperating in the execution of the crime without
participating as a principal, by prior or simultaneous acts while Conspirator Participates in the
commission of a crime as a co-principal.

11. A. Who is an accessory? Give the elements. (5 pts)

Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or accomplices

1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime;

2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to
prevent its discovery;

3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of the crime, provided the
accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of
treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other;

C. What are the three kinds of accessory? Give example for each
kind.
Answer; The following are the three kinds of accessory;
1. Principal by Participation
Example: If a person physically participates in a robbery by
holding a weapon and demanding money from the victim, that
person is a principal by direct participation.
 2. Princinpal by Indispensable cooperation
Example: If a person provides critical information or equipment
necessary for a group planning a terrorist attack, and without
which the attack could not proceed, that person is a principal by
indispensable cooperation.

3. Accessory of the fact

Example: If someone helps a friend hide from the police after
committing a murder, providing shelter, transportation, or any
form of assistance to evade authorities, that person is an
accessory after the fact.

C. Distinguish accessory from an accomplice.

Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or accomplices while The accomplice merely cooperate in the commission
of the crime by previous of simultaneous acts. The participation is only minor in character. It only provides material and moral
aide in an efficacious manner but not in an indispensable manner.

12. A. Elements of Fencing under PD 1612. (5 pts)

The following are the elements of Fencing under PD 1612

1. A robbery or theft has been committed;
2. The accused, who took no part in the robbery or theft, buys, receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or disposes,
or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any article or object taken during that robbery or theft;
3. The accused knows or should have known that the thing derived from that crime; and
4. He intends by the deal he makes to gain for himself or for another.

D. What is the prima facie presumption of fencing under PD 1612?

a prima facie presumption of fencing. The burden of evidence is shifted on the accused. Prima Facie the mere
possession of the property that has been stolen/lost.

E. Give illustrative case of fencing.

X was a house helper. One night, when the master was not home, X went to the room of his master and took the
jewelries worth 500k and cash worth 1M from the cabinet. X went to his mother and told her that she stole the
jewelries and cash from the master. The mother deposited the cash to a bank. The mother sold the jewelries to a
jewelry store in a discounted amount of 100k. When the master came home, he found the jewelries and cash missing.
The master reported the incident to the police. Upon investigation, the police apprehended X, the mother, and the
jewelry store owner.
F. Distinguish accessory in the RPC and the Anti-Fencing Law.
The RPC answer;
D. In the RPC, an accessory is someone who, after the
commission of a felony, conceals or assists the offender in
escaping arrest, trial, or punishment. The concept of being an
accessory is found in Articles 19 to 40 of the RPC. while in the
Anti-Fencing Law addresses the crime of fencing, which involves
dealing in stolen property. An accessory under this law is
someone who, with knowledge or having reason to believe that
the property is stolen, acquires, receives, possesses, keeps, or
uses the property and assists in its disposal.

13. A. What are the two kinds of accessories under Art. 19, par. 3?
(5 pts)
In article 19, Par 3. are the following two kinds of accessories;
1. Harboring, concealing, or assisting
2. the offender is guilty of treason. parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the
Chief Exec, habitually guilty of some other crime

B. Supposing, Juan, a police investigator, received a call from Pedro

right before the shooting of Maria. According to the call, Pedro
will kill Maria at around 8 P.M. and it would be best if Juan would
not effect his immediate arrest and to conduct an investigation.
Just before 8 PM, Juan left the station and went home. After the
shooting, the Chief of Police had a hard time contacting Juan,
whose phone was turned off. Juan came to the office only after
three days after knowing that Pedro was able to escape. Juan
kept the information to himself. Is Juan an accomplice or an
accessory? Discuss your answer.

Answer; Juan is an accessory to the crime. under the penal law,

accessory are those who have knowledge in the commission of
the crime without participated in the commission therein. In this
case, Juan, a police investigator received a call from Pedro about
the plan of killing Maria however Juan concealed the plan
through going home, and returned after three days knowing
Pedro was able to escape. Juan had a knowledge of the plan of
killing Maria but did not participated in the commission of the
crime. Hence, Juan is an accessory of the crime.
C. Can Juan be charged with obstruction of justice under PD 1829?
Why or why not? Discuss your answer.
Answer; C. Yes. Under the RPC, Obstruction of Justice is committed by
any person who willfully and lawfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or
delays the apprehension of suspects and the investigation and
prosecution of criminal cases.
In this case, Juan, a police investigator, after having a knowledge of
the plan of killing Maria, he willfully and lawfully obstructs, impedes,
frustrate or delays the apprehension of the suspect because he went
home, turned off his cellphone and went back to office after knowing
that Pedro was able to escaped.
Hence, Juan shall be charged with obstruction of justice under PD
1829.

14.
A. Who is an accessory exempt from criminal liability.

B. What is the reason for the exemption?

C. Give example of an accessory exempt from criminal liability.

A. The following are the accessories (RPC) that are exempt from criminal liability are the spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate and adopted brothers and sisters, or relative by affinity within the
same degrees.

B. One reason for exemption is the preservation of cleanliness of one's name. Another is based on ties of
blood.

C. An accessory is exempted from criminal liability when he is related within 4th Civil degree of
affinity/consanguinity of principal in relation to concealing the body of the crime, harboring offenders,
etc.