AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Aggravating circumstance not alleged.

 Those which serve to increase the penalty without, however, exceeding the o Generic aggravating circumstance even if not alleged in the information, may
maximum of the penalty provided by law for the offense be proven during the trial
 Basis: greater perversity of the offender manifested in the commission of the felony  Serve only to aid the court in fixing the limits of penalty but do not
shown by: change the character of offense
o Motivating power o As for qualifying aggravating circumstance, the same must be alleged in the
o Place of commission information
o Means and ways employed  Ratio: it's an integral part of the offense
o Time  When the qualifying is not alleged, it is treated as generic
o Personal circumstances of the offender or of the offended party
 Aggravating circumstances are not presumed; must be proved as fully as the crime ***pursuant to the 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, every Complaint or
itself in order to increase the penalty Information must state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances. If
 Kinds: not alleged, they may be appreciated as bases for the award of exemplary damages.
o Generic
 Generally apply to all crimes Qualifying circumstances need not be preceded by the words
"aggravating/qualifying", "qualifying" or "qualified by" to be considered as
 Example: dwelling, nighttime, or recidivism
qualifying circumstances
 In Article 14: paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 18, 19, 20 except o It's already sufficient that these circumstances be specified in the Information
"by means of motor vehicles"
to apprise the accused of the charges against him
2. Specific o Effect when it needs to be alleged: court is constrained to impose the higher
penalty mandated by law
 Apply only to particular crimes
 Example: ignominy (dishonor) in crimes against chastity or cruelty and Aggravating circumstances which do not have the effect of increasing the penalty
treachery in crimes against persons
1. Aggravating circumstances which:
 In Art. 14: paragraphs 15, 16, 17, and 21 a. Constitute a crime especially punishable by law
b. Included by the in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty thereof
3. Qualifying 2. Same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstance inherent
 Change the nature of the crime in the crime
 Example: alevosia (treachery)/ evident premeditation a. Evident premeditation is inherent in theft etc.
 Enumerated in Article 248. b. Taking advantage of public position is inherent when offenders who
are public officers committed crimes in exercise of duties
4. Inherent
 Must of necessity accompany the commission of the crime (Art. 62(2)) Aggravating circumstances which depend for their application upon the knowledge
 Example: evident premeditation is inherent in estafa, robbery, theft, of the offenders:
adultery, and concubinage o Material execution of the act
o Means employed to accomplish shall serve to aggravate the liability of those
Qualifying aggravating vs. Generic aggravating persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution
Qualifying aggravating Generic aggravating

Not only to give the crime its proper Effect (if not offset by other circumstance): Aggravating circumstances which are personal to the offenders shall only serve to
and exclusive name but also to place increase the penalty which should be imposed aggravate the liability of the offender himself whom such circumstances are
the author thereof in such a situation upon the accused to the maximum period but attendant (Art. 62, par. 3)
as to deserve no other penalty than without exceeding the limit prescribed by law
1. From the moral attributes of the offender
that specially prescribed by law
2. From his private relations with the offended party
Cannot be offset by a mitigating May be compensated by a mitigating 3. From any other personal cause
circumstance circumstance

Must be alleged in the Information If not alleged, then it's only a generic
aggravating circumstance only
Article 14. Aggravating circumstances
The following are aggravating circumstances:
That advantage be taken by the offender of his public
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position. position.
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public authorities.
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, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the BASIS
offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.
4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness. - Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the personal circumstance of the
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or offender and by the means used to secure the commission of the crime.
where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship. DID THE ACCUSED ABUSE HIS OFFICE IN ORDER TO COMMIT THE CRIME?
6. That the crime be committed in the nighttime, or in an uninhabited place, or by a band,
whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. - This circumstance may only be committed by a public officer who takes advantage of
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the his public position.
commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. - Public officer must use his prestige, influence, or ascendency.
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, - Wearing of uniform is immaterial.
epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford PRESENT WHEN
impunity.chanrobles virtual law library
9. That the accused is a recidivist. - Policeman maltreats prisoner
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously - Police shot the witness against him for grave threats
convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code. - Police disarms opponent using his authority and then shoots him
10. That the offender has been previously punished by an offense to which the law - Councilor collects fines and misappropriates them
attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter - Failure in official duties.
penalty. - Police robbed a family who was terrified of them and acceded to their demands.
11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding NOT PRESENT WHEN
of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of
any other artifice involving great waste and ruin. - Congressman resists arrest when gambling
13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation. - When public officer did not take advantage of the influence of his position
14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed. - Judge misappropriates money he received extra-judicially
15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to weaken the - No proof presented for the allegation of such aggravating circumstance
defense. - Taking advantage of public position is inherent in the crime e.g. malversation and
16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). falsification of documents.
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, - If accused could have perpetrated the crime without occupying his public position
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.chanrobles virtual law library
17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the
natural effects of the act.
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the
There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window
be broken. public authorities.
20. 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. (As
amended by RA 5438). BASIS
21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by
causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions. - Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his lack of respect for public authorities

REQUISITES
1) Public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions - Rank. There must be a difference in the social condition of the offender and the
2) Public authority is not the person against whom the crime is committed offended.
3) Offender knows that he is a public authority - Age. When there is a considerable difference in the age gap e.g. against infants,
4) Public authority’s presence has not prevented the offender from committing the act children, or senile persons.
- Sex. Against women only.
PUBLIC AUTHORITY
NOT PRESENT WHEN
- Person in authority who is directly vested with jurisdiction to govern and execute the
laws. - Offender acted with passion or obfuscation
- Sex. There exists a relationship between the offended party and the offender.
AGENT OF AUTHORITY
ON DWELLING
- Any person who, by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by
competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the DWELLING
protection and security of life and property
- Any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority - A building or structure exclusively used for rest and comfort.
 Dependencies
 Foot of the staircase
 Enclosure under the house
 Boarding house
That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the  Homes of their parents
respect due the offended party on account of his rank, age,  Temporary dwelling
 Guests in a house
or sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended  House occupied by a spouse other than the conjugal home
party, if the latter has not given provocation.  Conjugal home in case of cheating spouse in the house itself
- A combination house and store and market stall is not a dwelling.
BASIS RATIO

- Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the personal circumstances of the - Dwelling is a sacred place for its owner.
offended party and the place of the commission of the crime - Law accords sanctity of privacy to human abode.

CIRCUMSTANCES (IF MORE THAN ONE IS PRESENT, THEY SHALL BE ON PROVOCATION

CONSIDERED TOGETHER)
- All must be present, if not then it is an aggravating circumstance:
- Rank = high social position or standing  Given by the owner
- Age  Sufficient
- Sex
 Immediate to the commission of the crime
- Dwelling
- Burden of proof to show provocation lies with the prosecution.
ON RANK, AGE, AND SEX
PRESENT WHEN
APPLICABLE WHEN
- Victim was injured inside the home even if offender is outside.
- Applicable in crimes against persons or honor - Injury was consummated outside the dwelling but it started inside.
- May only be considered if there was some sort of disrespect.
- Not present in crimes against property e.g. robbery or robbery with homicide NOT PRESENT WHEN
- Proof is necessary.
- Both offender and offended are occupants of the same dwelling
PRESENT WHEN - Robbery is committed with the use of force upon things because dwelling is inherent
- Trespass because dwelling is inherent
- Owner gave provocation That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief
- If the offended does not own the dwelling
- Both spouses and kabit live together Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are
- Treachery engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship.

That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or BASIS

obvious ungratefulness. - Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the place of the commission of the
crime, which must be respected.

BASIS PAR. 5 v. PAR. 2

- Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the means and ways employed. Place where public authorities are Contempt or insult to public
engaged… authorities
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE Must be in their office Outside of their office
May be the offended party Should not be the offended party
- When the offended party has trusted the offender who later abuses such trust by
They are discharged in the performance of their duties.
committing the crime
- Must be a means of facilitating the commission of the crime
- Culprit took advantage of offended’s belief that he will not abuse the confidence OTHER NOTES
REQUISTIES - Does not require that official or religious functions are being held in the place during
the commission of the crime.
- Offended party had trusted the offender
- Cemetery not included.
- Offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party
- The offender must already have the intention to commit the crime when he entered.
- Abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime

OTHER NOTES

- The confidence between the offender and the offended party must be immediate and
personal.
- Abuse of confidence is inherent in malversation, qualified theft, estafa by conversion
or misappropriation, and qualified seduction.
That the crime be committed in the nighttime, or in an
uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever such
circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense.

Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have

OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be
OTHER NOTES deemed to have been committed by a band.
- Ungratefulness must be manifest and clear BASIS
- No ungratefulness when the parties live in the same house if the house is not the - Based on the greater perversity of the offender as shown by the time and place of the
property of the offended party. commission of the crime and means and ways employed

APPLICATION

- General Rule: If more than one is present, they constitute only one aggravating
circumstance.
- Exception: consider them separately if their elements are distinctly perceived and can
subsist independently, revealing a greater degree of perversity
WHEN AGGRAVATING APPLICATION

1. When it facilitated the commission of the crime - Aggravating when the offenders chose the place as an aid
2. When it was especially sought for to ensure the commission or for the purpose  To an easy and uninterrupted accomplishment
of impunity = intention  To ensure concealment of the offense
a. Especially sought for when he sought for it in order to realize the crime - Not aggravating when
with more ease
 Offender casually encountered the accused
b. Not especially sought for when the notion to commit the crime was
conceived only shortly before its commission
 If the accused did not select the place
c. Especially sought for when the offender waited for the night
3. When the offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity (prevent
his being recognized) BAND

NIGHTTIME APPLICATION

- Period of darkness beginning at end of dusk and ending at dawn - Aggravating when
- From sunset to sunrise  Use of stones
- Not by and of itself aggravating. Only becomes aggravating when it was especially  All armed men had a direct participation
sought for or taken advantage of by him
 In crimes against property or against persons or in the crime of illegal detention or
- Not aggravating when nighttime was only incidental to the commission of the crime.
treason
- Aggravating even if matchstick or flashlight is used
 Robbery with homicide
TESTS FOR NOCTURNITY TO BE AN AGGRAVATING OFFENSE - Not aggravating when
 Only one of them committed the crime while the others were not aware
- Objective test = when it facilitates the commission of the crime
 Even if there are 20 persons but only three were armed
- Subjective test = when it was purposely sought by the offender
 The fourth person is only a principal by inducement
NIGHTTIME NOT AGGRAVATING WHEN  When the meeting was only casual
 In crimes against chastity
- It began at daytime
- When offender did not intentionally seek the cover of darkness = there is light of OTHER NOTES
sufficient brilliance
- Daybreak - The aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of their superior strength and with
- Place of crime illuminated by light the use of firearms is absorbed by the generic aggravating circumstance of the
- No evidence that the accused had purposely sought the cover of the darkness or that commission of the offense by a band.
it facilitated the commission - By a band is inherent in brigandage and should not be considered as aggravating

UNINHABITED PLACE That the crime be committed on the occasion of a

- One where there are no houses at all, a place at a considerable distance from town, o conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic, or other
where the houses are scattered at a great distance from each other. calamity or misfortune.
- Not aggravating when the place could be seen and the voice of the offended could be
BASIS
heard.
- Whether or not in the place of the commission of the offense there was a reasonable - Reference to the time of the commission of the crime and not the means.
possibility of the victim receiving some help.
- Still aggravating even if there was someone else around if the presence of such is
purely accidental.
REASON FOR THE AGGRAVATION death. A was charged with parricide with the aid of armed men (People
v. Hane).
- Debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst of a calamity, instead of
o Example of “with the aid of armed men”: O and L were prosecuted for
lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of their
misfortune to despoil them. robbery with rape. They had companions who were armed when they
committed the crime. It was held that they were guilty of robbery with
APPLICATION rape with aggravating circumstance of aid of armed men (People v.
- Aggravating when: Ortiz).
 The offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune o Exceptions:
 Fireman who commits robbery in a burned house  Shall not be considered when both the attacking party and the
 Thief who immediately after a destructive typhoon steals personal property party attacked were equally armed
from the victims  Accused as well as those who cooperated with him in the
 “Or other calamity or misfortune” commission of the crime acted under the same plan and for
the same purpose (People v. Piring)
 Refers to other conditions of distress similar to those that is “conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake, or epidemic” o “With The Aid Of Armed Men” (Par. 8), Distinguished From “By A Band.”
(Par. 6)
 People v. Penjan: chaotic condition resulting from the liberation of San
Pablo was considered Paragraph 8: Aid of Armed Men Paragraph 6: By a Band
- Not aggravating when: Present even if one of the Requires more than 3 armed
 Offender was provoked by the offender party to commit the crime during offenders merely relied on their aid malefactors have acted
the calamity/misfortune because actual aid is not together
necessary
 People v. Corpus: Chaotic conditions after liberation
“Aid of armed men” is absorbed by
 People v. Arpa: Development of engine trouble at sea is a misfortune but
“employment of a band”
not within the context of the phrase “other calamity or misfortune”
 If there are 4 armed men,
it is absorbed
That the crime be committed with the aid of (1) armed men,  If there are 3 or less, aid
of armed men may be the
or (2) persons who insure or afford impunity. aggravating
Includes “armed woman” in
kidnapping and serious illegal
BASIS
detention
- means and ways of committing the crime
 Armed men must take part directly or indirectly
REQUISITES
- Not aggravating when:
1. Armed men/persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly  Casual presence of armed men near the crime and when accused did not avail
2. Accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was himself of their aid
committed  Accused stabbed the deceased to death alone without assistance from anyone,
even though there were 10 armed men armed with daggers (US v. Abaigar)
APPLICATION

- Aggravating when:
 Accused must have avail himself of the aid of armed men
o Example of “with the aid of armed men”: A secured the services of 3
armed Moros to kill her husband. During the act, A held the light and
supplied the men with rope while the 3 men clubbed her husband to
 That the accused is a recidivist. 4. Accuse has applied for probation
BASIS
- Section 6 Rule 122:
- Greater perversity of the offender shown by his inclination to crimes  An appeal must be taken within 15 days from promulgation or notice of
judgement or order appealed from
RECIDIVIST

- one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted EMBRACED IN THE SAME TITLE OF RPC
by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the Revised Penal APPLICATION
Code
- Embraced in the same title when:
REQUISITES  Under Art. 10—RPC as supplementing special laws of penal character
o Usury case where the accused was previously convicted of the same
1. Offender is on trial for an offense
2. Previously convicted by final judgement of another crime offense (People v. Hodges)
3. Both the 1st and 2nd offense are embraced the same title of RPC - Not embraced in the same title when:
4. Offender is convicted of the new offense  Accused had been twice convicted of violation of the Revised Ordinances of the
City of Manila and subsequently prosecuted for gambling (under RPC)
AT THE TIME OF HIS TRIAL FOR ONE CRIME
 One offense is punishable by an ordinance or special law and the other by RPC;
- Meaning: everything that is done in the course of the trial (arraignment—sentence is 2 offenses are not embraced
announced by judge)
EXAMPLES OF CRIMES EMBRACED IN THE SAME TITLE
- What is controlling is the time of the trial not the time of the commission of the crime

APPLICATION  Robbery and theft (Title 10: Crimes against property)

- No recidivism when:
 Subsequent conviction is for an offense committed before the offense involved in
the prior conviction
o People v. Baldera
 Facts: The accused was convicted of robbery with homicide
committed on December 23, 1947. He was previously convicted
of theft committed on December 30, 1947.
 Held: The accused was not a recidivist
PREVIOUSLY CONVICTED BY FINAL JUDGEMENT
APPLICATION
- No recidivism when judgement is not yet final
 The accused was prosecuted and tried for theft, estafa and robbery. Judgments
for all three were rendered on the same day. He is not a recidivist because the
judgment of the first two were not final when he was tried for the third offense.
WHEN DOES A JUDGMENT IN CRIMINAL CASE BECOME FINAL?
- Section 7 Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
 Except where death penalty is imposed, it becomes final:
1. After the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal
2. When the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served
3. Accused has waived in writing his right to appeal
 Homicide and physical injuries (Title 8: crimes against persons)
 The felonies defined and penalized in Book II of Revised Penal Code are
grouped in different titles.
OTHER NOTES
- There is recidivism even if the lapse between 2 felonies is more than 10 years
- Pardon does don obliterate the fact that the accused was a recidivist BUT AMNESTY
extinguishes the penalty and its effects (US v. Sotelo)
That the offender has been previously punished for 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.
BASIS
- Same with recidivism; greater perversity due to inclination to crimes
ELEMENTS
1. Accused is on trial for an offense
2. He previously served sentence for another offense to which the law attaches an
equal or greater penalty, or for 2 or more crimes to which it attaches lighter
penalty than that for the new offense
3. Convicted of the new offense
 RECIDIVISM VS. REITERACION
REITERACION OR HABITUALITY RECIDIVISM REITERACION
- It is essential that the offender be previously punished; he has served a sentence Enough that a final judgement has been Necessary that the offender shall have
- Not attendant when the records did not disclose that the accused has been rendered in the 1st offense served out his sentence for the 1st
previously punished (People v. Villapando) offense
- Not always aggravating
Requires that the offenses be included in Previous and subsequent offenses must
 When penalty for murder is death and offender has been previously convicted for the same Title of the Code not be embraced in the same title
crime against property and not persons, court may not use this aggravating Always to be taken into consideration in Not always an aggravating circumstance
circumstance fixing the penalty to be imposed upon the
accused
HAS BEN PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED
No requirement as to the penalty Prior crime must have been penalized
- Means that the accused previously served sentence for another offense or sentence
for other offenses before his trial for the new offense imposed on the prior conviction with an equal/greater penalty or 2 or
- Present when: more crimes with lighter penalty
1. Penalty provided by law for the previous offense is equal to that for the new
offense, or
2. When the penalty provided by law for the previous offense is greater, or FOUR FORMS OF REPETITION:
3. When the accused served at least 2 sentences, even if penalties provided 1. Recidivism (Article 14, Par. 9) [Generic aggravating]
by law for the crimes are lighter 2. Reiteracion or habituality (Article 14, Par. 10) [Generic aggravating]
3. Multi-recidivism or habitual delinquency (Article 62, par. 5) [Extraordinary
aggravating]
APPLICATION & EXAMPLES:
4. Quasi-recidivism (Article 160) [Special aggravating]
Note: It is the penalty attached to the offense, not the penalty actually imposed
HABITUAL DELIQUENCY
X X X AN EQUAL PENALTY - A person, within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction of
 A served sentence for forcible abduction punishable by reclusion temporal then the crime of serious or less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or
committed homicide after being released, which is also punishable by reclusion falsification is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
temporal. - In habitual delinquency, he is either a recidivist or punished for habituality (two or more
crimes).
X X X GREATER PENALTY
- Shall suffer additional penalty for being a habitual delinquent.
 A served sentence for homicide punishable by reclusion temporal then
committed falsification after punishable by a penalty ranging from 6 years and 1
day to 12 years. QUASI-RECIDIVISM
o There is reiteracion or habituality because the penalty for homicide for - Any person who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment,
which he served sentence is greater than that for the new offense before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same, shall be punished
(falsification) by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony. (Article
 Homicide before and after? 160)
o There is recidivism because the first and 2nd offenses are embraced in - This is a special aggravating circumstance that can’t be offset, and penalizes the
the same title of RPC.
offender with the max period of the new felony committed.
 Falsification first and homicide after?
o Example: Accused is serving sentence for homicide. Then kills
o No, because the penalty for the first offense is less than for the 2 nd
offense. It must be that the 1st must be equal or greater to the 2nd. someone in prison. He’ll get the max period for his second homicide.

PUNISHED X X X FOR 2 OR MORE CRIMES TO WHICH IT ATTACHES A LIGHTER

PENALTY
 Previous 2 offenses, the law provides lesser penalties
o A served 30 days for theft; then served 2 months for estafa; now tried
for homicide (reclusion temporal=12 years and one day to 20 yrs)
 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price,
reward or promise.
BASIS
- Greater perversity shown by the motivating power itself
NOTES
- Aggravating circumstance presupposes the occurrence of 2 or more offenders
 There must be 2 or more principals: one who gives or offers the price or promise
and the one who accepts it
 Both are principals because the former induces the latter to commit the
crime while the latter actually commits it
- Affects not only to the person who received the price or reward BUT also the person
who gave it (offeror=acceptor)
- Price, reward, or promise MUST be for the purpose of inducing another to perform a
deed
o For this aggravating circumstance to be considered against the person,
inducement must be primary consideration for the commission of the crime
o Evidence must show that one of the accused used money or other valuable for
the purpose of inducing another
o If without previous promise it was given voluntarily after the crime has been
committed as an expression of his appreciation for the sympathy and aid shown
by other accused, it should not be taken into consideration for the purpose of
increasing the penalty (US v. Flores)
12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire,
poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional
damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of
any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
BASIS
- Reference to means and ways employed
APPLICATION
- Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish a criminal purpose, any of the
circumstances in Par. 12 cannot be considered to increase the penalty/change the
nature of the offense
 Does not fall under Par. 12 when it is referred as a generic aggravating
circumstance:
o Example: In a crime of parricide, there is only a generic aggravating
circumstance, because they cannot qualify the crime.
 Ratio: When another aggravating circumstance already
qualifies the crime, any of these aggravating circumstances
shall be considered as generic aggravating circumstance
only.
 Does not fall under Par. 12: When there is no actual design to kill a person in
burning a house, it is plain arson even if a person is killed.
 Other circumstances not under Par. 12:
1. House was set on fire after the killing of the victim resulting to 2 separate
crimes of arson and murder/homicide. Cannot be considered as an
aggravating circumstance “by means of fire”
2. If there is an explosion, and the wall is damaged thus endangering the lives
of the people there, there is damage of property (Article 324).
3. Damage to means of communication is committed if property is damaged as
a result of the derailment of cars.
o If death of a person also results without intent to kill on part of the
offender, it is a complex crime of damage to means of communication
with homicide.
CIRCUMSTANCES QUALIFIED UNDER PAR 12.
When used as means to kill another person, the crime is murder
1. “By means of fire”
- In order to constitute a murder, there should be an actual design to kill and that the
use of fire should be purposely adopted as a means to that end (US v. Burns).
2. “By means of explosion”
- If there is intent to kill and explosion is used, there is murder.
3. “By means of derailment of locomotive”
- If there was intent to kill and the death results, it is murder because the derailment of
cars was the means used to kill the victim.
PARAGRAPH 12 VS. PARAGRPAH 7
Paragraph 12 Paragraph 7
Crime is committed by means of any of Crime is committed on the occasion of a
such acts involving great waste or ruin calamity or misfortune
NOTE:
- Each of the circumstances of fire, explosion and derailment of locomotive may be a
part of the definition of particular crime. In these cases, they do not serve to
increase the penalty, because they are already included by the law in defining the
crime.
 13. That the act be committed with evident premeditation
BASIS
- Ways of committing the crime that implies a deliberate planning of the act before
executing it
ESSENCE OF PREMEDITATION
- The execution of the criminal at must be preceded by cool thought and reflection
upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during the space of time sufficient
to arrive at a calm judgement
PREMEDITATION MUST BE EVIDENT AND NOT MERELY SUSPECTED
Requisites:
1. Time when the offender determined to commit the crime
o This is essential because the 3rd requisite is computed from that date
and time
2. Act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination
o Premeditation must be based upon external acts and not presumed
from mere lapse of time
o Criminal intent must be notorious and manifest; the person who
conceived and resolved upon the perpetration of the crime undergone
deliberation, meditation, and reflection sometime before the
commission
o Mere threats without the 2nd element does not show evident
premeditation
o Existence of ill-feeling or grudge alone is not proof of evident
premeditation
3. Sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to allow him to
reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to
overcome the resolution of his will
ILLUSTRATIVE CASE: US V. MANALINDE
- (1st requisite) On a certain date, the accused accepted a proposition that he would
go huramentado and to kill the 2 persons he would meet.
- (2nd requisite) He undertook the journey to comply and provided himself with the
weapon, which manifests his determination to commit the crime.
- (3rd requisite) He took a journey for a day and a night before killing the victims. Such
duration is a sufficient lapse of time.
OTHER NOTES:
- Conspiracy generally presupposes premeditation
o When conspiracy is directly established, the existence of evident
premeditation can be taken for granted.
 Exception: When conspiracy is only implied, evident premeditation my not be
appreciated (in the absence of proof as to how and when the plan to kill was
hatched).
- Evident premeditation and price or reward can co-exist
- When victim is difference from that intended, premeditation is not aggravating
- Evident premeditation (while inherent in robbery) may be aggravating in robbery with
homicide IF THE PREMEDITATION included the killing of the victim
o If the killing is only incidental because the original plan was only to rob,
this aggravating circumstance should be disregarded.
o Thus:
 If in addition to the crime of robbery, the accused intended to
kill a person (robbery with homicide), evident premeditation is
aggravating.
 But if he had no plan to kill a person, but ends up killing a
person in the house who put up some form of resistance, no
evident premeditation (People v Curachia)
14. That (1) craft, (2) fraud, or (3) disguise be employed.
BASIS
- Means employed in the commission of the crime
APPLICATION
This circumstance is characterized by the intellectual or mental rather than the
physical means to which the criminal resorts to carry out his design.
CRAFT
- Involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the accused
- Chicanery resorted to by the accuse to aid in the execution of his criminal design;
scheme in the execution of the crime
- Example:
 When the accused pretended to be bona fide passengers in the taxicab driven
by the diseased in order to not arouse his suspicion and then killing him, there
is craft (People v. Daos)
-Not an Aggravating Circumstance:
 Where craft partakes of an element of the offense, the same may not be
appreciated independently for the purpose of aggravation.
 Craft is not clearly established where accused and his companions did not
camouflage their hostile intentions and even announced their presence with
shouts and gunshots (People v. Cunanan)
FRAUD
- Insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner which
would enable the offender to carry out his design
- Example: Where the defendants induced their victims to give up their arms upon a Circumstance of “by a band” vs that of “abuse of superior strength”
promise that no harm would befall them (US v. Abelinde) BY A BAND ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH
Element of a band is appreciated when What is taken into account is “not” the
CRAFT VS. FRAUD the offense is committed by more than 3 number of aggressors nor the fact that
CRAFT FRAUD armed malefactors regardless of the they are armed BUT their relative
When the act of the accused done in When there is a direct inducement by comparative strength of the victim physical might vis-à-vis the offended
order not to arouse the suspicion of the insidious words/machinations party
victim

DISGUISE “Means employed to weaken defense”

- Resorting to any device to conceal identity
- Examples:
 Defendant blackened his face in order that he should not be recognized (US v.
Cofrada).
 Use of an assumed name in publication (People v. Adamos)
- Not considered when:
 Disguise was not effective in concealing identity
o Example: Even though the accused assumed a masquerade his face was
still recognizable due to their distinct features (People v. Reyes)
- Example: when one suddenly casts sand or dirt upon the latter’s eyes and then
wounds or kills him
- Intoxicating the victim to weaken defense
 If the state of intoxication is such that the victim cannot put up any sort of
defense, treachery may be considered
- Applicable only to crimes against persons
 Sometimes against person and property
- Means to weaken the defense absorbed by treachery

16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia)

15. That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or (2)
BASIS
means employed to weaken the defense. - Reference to the means and ways employed in the commission of the crime

“Advantage be taken”
- To use purposely excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available
to the person attacked
ILLUSTRATION OF ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH
 When a strong man has ill-treated a child, an old decrepit person, or one
weakened by disease or where a person’s physical strength has been
overcome by the use of drugs or intoxicants.
 Present when a man attacks a woman with a weapon
 Number of aggressors, if armed, may point to abuse of superior strength
 Present when weapons used is out of proportion to the defense available to the
offended party
When abuse of superior strength is aggravating:
- Depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties
- It is considered whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim
and the aggressor which is taken advantage of him in the commission of the crime
- Other crimes in which abuse of superior strength is aggravating:
 Illegal detention
 Robbery with rape
 Robbery with homicide
TREACHERY
- When offender commits any of the crime 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 offender party
might take
- Means that the offender party was not given opportunity to make a defense
- It is present when the attack is:
1. Sudden
2. Unexpected
3. Without warning
4. Without giving the victim an opportunity to defend himself or repel the
aggression
RULES REGARDING TREACHERY
1. Applicable only to crimes against the person
2. Means, methods, or forms need not ensure accomplishment of crime
o Not necessary that the mode of attack insures the consummation of
offense
o What is necessary is to insure ITS EXECUTION not accomplishment
o Treachery cannot be presumed
 It is necessary that the existence of this qualifying or
aggravating circumstance should be proven as fully as the
 crime itself in order to aggravate the liability or penalty o Summary of the Rules:
incurred by the culprit. o When the aggression is continuous, treachery must be present at the
3. The mode of attack must be consciously adopted beginning of the assault (People v. Cañete).
o Means that the accused must make some preparation to kill the o When the assault not continuous, in that there was an interruption, it is
deceased in such a manner as to insure the execution of the crime or sufficient that treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow was
to make it impossible for the person to defend himself given (US v. Baluyot).
o Mode of attack must be thought of by the offender and must not spring
from unexpected turn of events TREACHERY VS. ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGHT VS. MEANS EMPLOYED TO
WEAKEN THE DEFENSE
REQUISITES OF TREACHERY Treachery Abuse of Superior Means employed to
1. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself; Strength Weaken the Defense
and
Means, methods, or forms Offender does not employ Offender employs means
2. Offender consciously adopted the particular means, method, or form of attack
employed by him of attack are employed by means, methods or forms but the means employed
the offender to make it of attack; he only takes only materially weakens
Instances where treachery may not exist: impossible or hard for the advantage of his superior the resisting power of the
o Mere sudden and unexpected attack does not necessarily give rise to offended party to put up strength offended party
treachery. any sort of resistance
o When the accused gave the deceased a chance to prepare, there was no
treachery.
o No treachery where the attack is preceded by a warning. WHAT IS ABSORBED IN TREACHERY?
o No treachery where shooting is preceded by heated discussion - Treachery absorbs:
o If the intervention of the other persons did not directly and especially insure the 1. Abuse of superior strength
execution of the crime without risk to the accused, there is no treachery 2. Aid of armed men
o Attack from behind is not always alevosia 3. By a band
4. Nighttime
Instances where treachery may exist:
5. Means to weaken the defense
o There is treachery in killing a child
o Intent to kill is not necessary in murder with treachery. 6. Craft
o Treachery may exist even if the attack is face to face 7. Murder by poison
o Flashing the beam of a flashlight on the face of victim 8. Age and sex
o Despite mistake in identity, treachery may be taken into account
o Ratio: when there is treachery, it is impossible for either the intended
victim or the actual victim to defend himself against the aggression OTHER NOTES:
- When there is conspiracy, treachery is considered against all the offenders
- The mastermind should have knowledge of the employment of treachery if he was
not present when the crime was committed
- Treachery cannot co-exists with passion or obfuscation
o In passion or obfuscation, the offender loses his reason and self-
MUST TREACHERY BE PRESENT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ASSAULT? control.
o It depends on the circumstances of the case o In treachery, the mode of attack must be consciously adopted.
o General Rule: It must be shown that the treacherous acts were present and
preceded the commencement of the attack which caused the injury complained
of.
o Exception: Even though in the inception of the aggression which ended
in the death of the deceased, treachery was not present, if there was a
break in the continuity of the aggression and at the time the fatal wound
was inflicted on the deceased he was defenseless, the circumstance of
treachery must be taken into account.