Skip to main content

Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances

 CHAPTER 14: AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Aggravating circumstances are those which show greater perversity of the offender hence they have the effect of imposing the maximum with that provided for by law.

May be distinguished in the following manner from mitigating circumstance

1. The list in Article 13 includes analogous circumstances showing liberality of the law in favor of the accused in article 14, the list is exclusive to curtail discretion of the judge to determine what other circumstances may increase the penalty.

2. Mitigating circumstance may lower the penalty by degree in the Immoral motive, while it may find support in evidence may not be considered as it does not gall under any aggravating circumstance enumerated in article 14 of the RPC.

4 kinds of aggravating circumstances -

1. GENERIC CIRCUMSTANCE  –

• have the effect of the penalty being imposed in the maximum period. Note that penalty prescribed in Book II of the case is the max imposable

• apply to all felonies

• can be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance

• prior to the amendment of the rules of criminal procedure, qualifying circumstance not alleged in the Information but proved may be appreciated as a generic aggravating circumstance…but when revised under Sec. 8, rule 110 – be specifically included in the aggravating circumstance.

2.QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE-

• Cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance

• Change the nature of the crime and the designation of the offense.

• Must be alleged in the information, otherwise, it cannot be considered against the offender as such because it will violate the right of the accused to be informed of the nature of the accusation against him since qualifying circumstances changes the nature of the offense. This is beside the fact that the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure new requires specification of qualifying circumstances in the information.

• Must be proven as conclusively as the guilt of the offender because in changes the nature of the offense with the corresponding increase in the penalty. For instance, homicide is penalized with reclusion temporal (20 years maximum). With one qualifying circumstance, it becomes murder penalizd with reclusion perpetua (20 years maximum) this the penalty is doubled.

3. SPECIAL OR SPECIFIC AGGRAVATING CIRCUSMTANCE WHICH APPLY TO A PARTICULAR FELONY. They do not change the character of the offense charges but.

4. INHERENT AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE – which is an element of the felony thus no longer considered against the offender in the determination of the penalty (Art 62 no 2)

Where one of the aggravating circumstances has been used as a qualifying circumstance, the others will be deemed generic. Since treachery has already been used to qualify the crime as murder, the evident premeditation should be considered as only a generic aggravating circumstance (People v Fabios October 1992)

Conspiracy is not aggravating, it is also not qualifying, it is mode or manner of acquiring collective liability. “The act of one is the act of all.” The presence of conspiracy cannot per se qualify the killing to murder.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

ART. 17. PRINCIPALS- Principal by Direct Participation- Revised Penal Code

  ART. 17. PRINCIPALS I. There are three kinds of principals depending on the nature of their participation in the commission of the crime. However, irrespective of what type of principal they belong, their penalty will be the same. They are the following: A. Principal by Direct Participation B. Principal by Indespensable Cooperation C. Principal by Inducement A. BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION (PDP) A. This refers to those who actually and directly take part in the execution of the act. In all crimes there must always be those who actually perform the act which brings about the crime. They may be only one person or more. Whenever there are two or more involved in a crime, it becomes necessary to find out those who actually executed the act so that all may be held equally liable. B. To hold two or more persons as principals by direct participation, it must be shown that there exists a conspiracy between and among them. This is not the conspiracy punished as a crime but the co...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Digests- Statutory Construction

  Government of the Phil. Islands v. HSBC, G.R. No. 44257, 22 November 1938   Facts: The appellees are banks doing business in the Philippines. This has been brought about   by the appellant to determine the liability of the appellees under section 11 of Act No. 4007. All the appellees demurred to the complaint upon the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Deeming the statutory provision relied upon by the appellant was unconstitutional. The National City Bank of New York alleged further, in support of the demurrer filed by it, that there was a misjoinder of parties defendant, and that section 11 of Act No. 4007 did not impose any tax upon national banking associations, in which class it belonged. The court below sustained the demurrers filed by the appellees, on the sole ground that the complaint did not allege a cause of action, because the statutory provision involved was unconstitutional. It questions now the constitut...
Post a Comment
Read more

Art. 17- PRINCIPALS BY INDUCEMENT (PI)- Revised Penal Code

  B. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCEMENT (PI)   I. Concept: Those who induce (PDP) to commit a crime either by: (a) force (b). inducement II. The use of force involves the application of either: A. Active force or material force upon the person of the PDP, resulting to serious bodily injury, to such a degree that the PDP is left with no choice but to do as ordered or B. Instilling fear of the commission or infliction of an equal or greater injury or evil either to the PDP or the latter’s family or even to a third person. The PDP may set up the use of force as an exempting circumstance. III. Inducement connotes that there was an agreement or conspiracy between the PI and the PDP. The inducement assumes several forms such as the following A. By the giving of a price, promise or reward. This must be made with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime and not as an expression of appreciation. The same must be the sole reason for the commission of the crime. T...
Post a Comment
Read more