Article 14. Aggravating Circumstances.- The following
are aggravating circumstances
Para (1). That advantage be taken by the offender of
his public position.
Type: Special Aggravating Circumstances
Basis: Based on greater perversity of the offender, as
shown by the personal circumstance of the offender
and also by the means used to secure the
commission of the crime.
Requisites:
1. Offender is a Public Officer
2. Such officer used the Influence, Prestige, or
Ascendancy which his office gives him
3. The same was used as means by which he
realizes his purpose.
Public Officer- is also known as person in authority, is
one directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, a public
officer who has the power to govern and execute the
laws whether as an individual or as a member of some
court or governmental corporation, board or
commission. E.g., barrio captain and a barangay
chairman. Lawyer and teacher are considered as
person in authority only in cases related to direct
assault.
Agent of a person in authority- a person, who, by
direct provision of the law, or by election or by
appointment by competent authority is charged, with
the maintenance of public order and the protection
and security of life and property and any person who
comes to the aid of persons in authority.
Present:
*When a councilor collects fines and misappropriates
them
*Peace officers taking advantage of their public
positions
• Wearing uniform is immaterial in certain cases
*Failure in official duties is tantamount to abusing of
office
Not Present:
*Not present when a Congressman offered resistance
to a peace officer
*When the public officer did not take advantage of the
influence of his position, this aggravating circumstance
is not present
*NOTE:
• Not aggravating when it is an integral element
of, or inherent in, the offense.
• When the offender/accused could have
perpetrated the crime without occupying the
police position
Para (2). That the crime be committed in contempt of
or with insult to the public authorities.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Based on the greater perversity of the offender,
as shown by his lack of respect for the public
authorities.
Requisites:
1. That the public authority is engaged in the
exercise of his functions
2. That he who is thus engaged in the exercise of
said functions is not the persons against
whom the crime is committed
3. The offender knows him to be a public
authority
4. His presence has not prevented the offender
from committing the criminal act
Applicable:
• When crime is committed in the presence of
an agent only
• If the crime is committed against the public
authority (it would become direct assault)
• If the presence of the public authority has not
prevented offender from committing the
crime
Essential: Knowledge of a pubic authority is present.
Effect of Failure to Allege Knowledge in Information:
- Failure to expressly allege in the Information
that the accused had the knowledge that the
person attacked was a person in authority
does not render the Information defective so
long as there are facts therein from which it
can be implied that the accused knew that the
person attacked was a person in authority
(People vs. Balbar)
Lois :))
Para (3). That the act be committed with insult or in
disregard of the respect due to offended party on
account of his rank, age, or sex, or that it be
committed in the dwelling of the offended party if
the latter has not given provocation.
(1) Insult or Disregard
Type: Specific Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
the personal circumstances of the offended party.
Requisites:
1. Insult or disregard was made on account of:
a. Rank—designation or title used to fix the
relative position of the offended party in
reference to others. There must be a
difference in the social condition of the
offender and offended party
b. Age- May refer to old age or tender age of
the victim
c. Sex- refers to the female sex
2. Such insult or disregard was deliberately
intended
**PLEASE REMEMBER!**
- IT IS ONLY APPLICABLE IN CRIMES AGAINST
PERSONS AND HONOR
Meaning of “with insult or in disregard”
- Prove that specific fact or circumstance, other
than the victim is a woman, showing insult or
disregard of sex (age and rank) in order that it
may be considered
- There must be evidence that in the
commission of the crime, the accused
deliberately intended to offend or insult the
sex or age of the offended party.
Rank—refers to a high social position or standing as a
grade in the armed forces; or to graded official
standing or social position or station; or to the order
or place in which said officers are placed in the army
and navy in relation to others; or to the designation or
title of distinction conferred upon an officer in order
to fix his relative position in reference to other officers
in matters of privileges, precedence, and sometimes
of command or by which to determine his pay and
emoluments as in the case of army staff officers; or to
a grade or official standing, relative position in civil or
social life, or in any scale of comparison, status, grade,
including its grade, status, or scale of comparison
within a position.
Requirements: Deliberate intent to offend or insult
Not applicable:
*Disregard of old age not aggravating in robbery with
homicide
- Roberry with homicide is primarily crime
against property and not crime against
persons.
- Homicide is a mere incident of the robbery,
the latter (robbery) being the main purpose
and object of the criminal (People vs.
Nabaluna)
*Killing a woman is NOT attended by this aggravating
circumstance if the offender did not manifest any
specific insult or disrespect towards her sex.
Not applicable:
*When the offender acted with passion and
obfuscation
- He could not have been conscious that his act
was done with disrespect to the offended
party
*When there exists a relationship between the
offended party and the offender
- Husband and wife (although divorced)
- Employer and laborer
*When the condition of being a woman is
indispensable in the commission of the crime (sex is
NOT aggravating)
- Parricide
- Rape
- Abduction
- Seduction
*NOTE: Disregard of sex absorbed in treachery
(2) Act committed in Dwelling
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
the place of the commission of the crime
Requisites:
1. Act was committed in the dwelling, which may
pertain to a:
a. Building; or
b. Structure, which is
Lois :))
c. Exclusively used for REST and COMFORT
2. Offended party must not give provocation
Reason: It is because of the sanctity of privacy the law
accords to human abode. According to one
commentator, one’s dwelling place is a “sanctuary
worthy of respect” and that one who slanders another
in the latter’s house is more guilty than he who
offends him elsewhere (People vs. Balansi).
What aggravates the commission of the crime in
one’s dwelling:
1. The abuse of confidence which the offended
party reposed in the offender by opening the
door to him; or
2. The violation of the sanctity of the home by
trespassing therein with violence or against
the will of the owner.
Viada—“The home is a sort of sacred place for its
owner. He who goes to another’s house to slander
him, hurt him or do him wrong, is more guilty than he
who offends him elsewhere.
Appreciated:
*The evidence must show that the defendant entered
the house of the deceased to attack him.
* The offender party must not give provocation
1. Given by the owner of the dwelling;
2. Sufficient, and
3. Immediate to the commission of the crime
Present
Not Present
Not Aggravating
Aggravating
*There must be close relation between provocation
and commission of crime in the dwelling
*If provocation is not immediate, dwelling is
aggravating
- People vs. Dequina
The defendant learned that the deceased and
the former’s wife were maintaining illicit
relations. One night, he went to the house of
the deceased and killed him then and there.
During the trial of the case, the defense
contended that the deceased provoked the
crime by his illicit relations with the
defendant’s wife.
Held: That the provocation (illicit relations)
was not given immediately prior to the
commission of the crime. Dwelling still
aggravating.
Even if the defendant came to know of the
illicit immediately before he went to the
house of the deceased, the aggravating
circumstance of dwelling may still be
considered against the defendant because the
provocation (illicit relations) did not take place
in that house.
If the defendant surprised the deceased and
the wife of the defendant in the act of
adultery in the house of the deceased, the
aggravating circumstance of dwelling would
not exist.
*Even if the offender did not enter the dwelling
- Although the triggerman fired the shot from
the outside the house, his victim was inside.
For this circumstance to be considered, it is
not necessary that the accused should have
actually entered the dwelling of the victim to
commit the offense; it is enough that the
victim was attacked inside his own house,
although the assailant may have devised
means to perpetrate the assault from without
(People vs. Ompaid).
- Even if the offender did not enter the upper
part of the house where the victim was, but
shot from under the house.
*Even if the killing took place outside the dwelling, it
is aggravating provided that the commission of the
crime was begun in the dwelling.
*In abduction or illegal detention
- Where the victim was taken from her or his
house and carried away to another place.
*Where the deceased had two houses where he used
to live, the commission of the crime in any of them.
* Where the husband killed his estranged wife in the
house solely occupied by her.
- IN CASE OF ADULTERY: When adultery is
committed in the dwelling of the husband,
even if it is also dwelling of the unfaithful wife,
it is aggravating because besides the latter’s
breach of the fidelity she ower her husband,
she and her paramour violated the respect
due to the conjugal home and they both
Lois :))
thereby injured and committed a very grave
offense against the head of the house.
o Note: Adultery is committed by a
married woman who shall have sexual
intercourse with a man not her
husband and by the man who has
carnal knowledge of her, knowing her
to be married.
Not Appreciated:
* Owner of the dwelling gave immediate provocation
* The deceased was called down from his house and
he was murdered in the vicinity of the house.
* When both the offender and the offended party are
occupants of the same house
- Even if the offender is a servant in the house
*In adultery the paramour also lives there.
- If both the defendants (wife and paramour)
and the offended party were living in the
same house because the defendants had a
right to be in the house.
- Aggravating circumstance of ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE, when the offended husband
took the paramour into his home, furnished
him with food and lodging without charge,
and treated him like a son (US vs. Destrito).
ROBBERY
Appreciated
* Robbery with violence
against or intimidation
against persons because
this class of robbery can
be committed without
the necessity of
trespassing the sanctity
of the offended party’s
house.
-dwelling is NOT
inherent
Not appreciated
committed by the use of
force upon things
because it is inherent.
- to commit robbery by
the use of force upon
things, the offender
must enter the dwelling
house, other building, of
the offended party.
*In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent or
included by the law in defining the crime. This crime
can be committed only in the dwelling of another.
* When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and
immediate provocation.
*When the dwelling where the crime was committed
did not belong to the offended party.
* When the rape was committed on the ground floor
of a two-story structure, the lower floor being used as
a video rental store and not as a private place of
abode or residence.
Appreciate although the crime was not committed in
the dwelling of the victim:
• The victim was raped in the boarding house where
he was a bedspacer.
o Her room constituted a “dwelling”
• The victims were raped in their paternal home
where they were guests at the time and did not
reside there.
• The victim was killed in the house of her aunt
where she was living with her niece.
o Dwelling may mean temporary dwelling
• The victims, while sleeping as guests in the house
of another person, were shot to death in that
house.
o The Code speaks of “dwelling” NOT
domicile.
*NOTE: Prosecution must prove that no provocation
was given by the offended party.
Para (4). That the act be committed with abuse of
confidence of obvious ungratefulness.
(1) Abused of Confidence
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Based on the greater perversity of the offender,
as shown by the ways employed in the
commission of the crime.
Requisites:
1. Offended party had trusted the offender
2. Offender abused such trust by committing a
crime
3. The abuse of confidence facilitated the
commission of the crime
*There must be immediate and personal relation
between the offender and the offended party.
Appreciated:
* Killing of child by an amah
Lois :))
-
When the killer of the child is the domestic
servant of the family and is sometimes the
deceased child’s amah.
Not Appreciated:
* Betrayal of confidence is not aggravating
- The offended party was living in the house of
the accused, her parents having entrusted her
to the care of the said accused. Then the
accused rape the offended party.
Abused of Confidence inherent in some felonies:
1. Malversation (Art. 217)
2. Qualified Theft (Art. 310)
3. Estafa by conversion or misappropriation (Art.
315)
4. Qualified Seduction (Art. 337)
(2) Obvious Ungratefulness
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Based on the greater perversity of the offender,
as shown by the ways employed in the commission
of the crime.
Requisites:
1. Offended party had trusted the offender
2. Offender abused such trust
3. Act was committed with obvious
ungratefulness
Appreciated:
*Accused killed his father-in-law in whose house he
lived and who partially supported him
* The accused was living in the house of the victim
who employed him as an overseer and in charge of
carpentry work, and had free access to the house of
the victim who was very kind to him, his family, and
who helped him solve his problems.
* A security guard killed a bank officer and robbed the
bank
* When a visitor commits robbery or theft in the
house of his host.
Para (5). That the crime be committed in the palace
of the Chief Executive, in his presence, or where
public authorities are engaged in the discharge of
their duties, or in place dedicated to religious
worship.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Based on the greater perversity of the offender,
as shown by the place of the commission of the
crime, which must be respected.
Requisite:
- Crime was committed:
1. In the Palace of the Chief Executive
2. In his Presence
3. Where public authorities are engaged
in the Discharge of their duties
4. In a place dedicated to religious
worship
Rules:
1. If committed in the Palce of the Chief Executive or
in a Church (Place of Religious Worship)
- It is aggravating regardless of whether State or
official or religious functions are being held.
The President need not be in the palace.
2. If committed in the Presence of the Chief
Executive
- It is aggravating regardless of the lace hwere
the crime is committed. It also applies even if
he is not engaged in the discharge of his
duties in the place where the crime was
committed.
3. Cemetries
- Not aggravating. It is not a place dedicated to
religious worship.
*Offender must have the intention to commit a crime
when he entered the place.
As to the
Acts
Punished
(Para. 2) vs. Para 5
CONTEMPT OR
PUBLIC
INSULT TO
AUTHORITIES
PUBLIC
ENGAGED IN THE
AUTHORITIES
DISCHARGE OF
DUTIES
Public Authorities are engaged in the
performance of their duties
Crime was
Crime was
committed in the
committed in a
presence of a
place where public
public authority
authorities are
engaged in the
engaged in the
performance of
Lois :))
As to
Offended
Party
his function,
regardless of the
place
-Presence ang
gidisregard
Public authority
should not be the
offended party
performance of
their duties
-Place ang
gidisregard
Offender party
may or may not be
the public
authority
*An electoral precinct during election day is a place
“where public authorities are engaged in the
discharge of their duties."
Not appreciated:
*The offender did not have an intention to commit a
crime when he entered the place.
Para (6). That the crime committed in the nighttime,
or in an inhabited place, or by a band, whenever
such circumstance may facilitate the commission of
the offense.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown on
the time and place of the commission of the crime
and means and ways employed.
Requisites:
- Circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place, or
band
1. Facilitated the commission of the crime;
2. Was especially sought by the offender to
insure the commission of the crime or for
purpose of impunity
3. When the offender took advantage of thereof
for the purpose of impunity
Can be considered separately
General Rule: If the concur in the commission of the
crime, they are considered as one aggravating
circumstance,
Exception: When the following are present:
a. When their elements are distinctly perceived
b. When they can subsist independently
c. When it reveals a greater degree of
perversity
(1) By nighttime (Nocturnidad)
- Article 13 CC, “Nights from sunset to sunrise.”
- Viada: the period of darkness beginning at end
of dusk and ending at dawn.
*The accused took advantage of the darkness for
more successful consummation of his plans, to
prevent being recognized, and that the crime might be
perpetrated unmolested,
*Intended by the offender to avail the darkness
*Because of the darkness of the night, the crime can
be perpetrated unmolested, or interference can be
avoided, or there would be greater certainty in
attaining the ends of the offender
* Defendant was able to consummate the crime with
all its dastardly details without anyone of the persons
living in the same premises becoming aware of what
was going on.
*Accused waited for the night before commiting
robbery with homicide.
*Offender especially sought for nighttime, when he
sought for it in order to realize the crime with more
ease.
*When the accused was living 150 meters away from
the victim’s house, and evidently waited for nightfall
to hide his identity and facilated his escape, knowing
that most og his barrio folks are already asleep, or
getting ready to sleep.
*The accused tried to ascertain whether the
oocupants of the house were asleep, thereby
indicating the desire to carry out the plot with the
least detection or to insure its consummation with a
minimum of resistance.
Nighttime need not be specifically sought for when:
1. It faciliated the commission of the offense
2. The offender took advantage of the same to
commit the crime
For the purpose of impunity—to prevent his
(accused’s) being recognized, or to secure himself
against detection and punishment.
*The silence and darkness of the night which enabled
the offender to take away the girl with impunity—a
thing which undoubtedly the offender could not have
done in the daytime and in sight of the people.
Lois :))
*When he availed himself thereof at the time of the
commission of the crime for the purpose of impunity
or for the more successful consummation of his plans.
*The prosecution must show that the accused
purposely sought to commit the crime at nighttime in
order to facilitate the achievement of his objectives,
prevent discovery, or evade capture.
*The information must allege that night was sought
for or taken advantage of by the accused or that it
facilitated the commission of the crime.
*Crime must begin and be accomplished in the
nighttime
Not Appreciated:
*When the crime began at daytime
* When the place of the crime is illuminated by light
*No evidence that the accused had purposely sought
the cover of the darkness of the night to commit the
crime
NOTE: The lighting of a matchstick or use of flashlights
does not negate the aggravating circumstance of
nighttime.
-
The offender must choose the place as an aid
either
1. To an easy and uninterrupted accomplishment
of their criminal designs
2. To insure concealment of the offense, that he
might thereby be better secured against
detection and punishment.
Note uninhabited place—when the place of crime
could be seen and the voice of the victim could be
heard from a nearby house
(3) By a band
Band—whenever more than three armed malefactors
shall have acted together in the commission of an
offense, it shall be demmed to have been committed
by a band.
Requisites:
1. There should be at least 4 persons
2. Such persons are armed
3. They acted together in the commission of an
offense
*Robbery with homicide
(2) By Uninhabited place
Uninhabited place—one where there are no houses
at all, a place at a considerable distance from town, or
where the houses are scattered at a great distance
from each other.
Aggravating: Whether or not in the place of the
commission of the offense, there was a reasonable
possibility of the victim receiving some help.
*Where the killing was done during the nighttime, in a
sugarcane plantation about a hundred meters from
the nearest house, and the sugarcane in the field was
tall enough to enough to obstruct the view of
neighbors and passersby.
* Where the felony was perpetrated in the open sea,
where no help could be expected by the victim from
other persons, and the offenders could easily escape
from punishment.
* When the victims are the occupants of the only
house in the place
Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal
purpose.
*Abused of superior strength and use of firearms are
abosrbed by the aggravating circumstance of by a
band.
*Stone is included in the term “arms”
Not Appreciated:
*If one of the four armed persons is a principal by
inducement
Crimes by a band:
1. Crimes against property
2. Crimes against persons
3. In the crime of illegal detention
4. Treason
*Not applicable to crimes against chastity.
*”By a band” is inherent in brigandage
Para (7). That the crime be committed on the
occasion of conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake,
epidemic, or other calamity or misfortune.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Lois :))
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown to
the time and place of the commission of the crime
Requisites:
- the offender must take advantage of the calamity
or misfortune
Reason:
- The debased form of criminality met in one who,
in the midst of great calamity, instead of lending
aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering by
taking advantage of their misfortune to despoil
them.
Other calamity or misfortune—refers to other
conditions or distress similar to conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic.
*A fireman who commits robbery in a burned house
*A thief who immediately after a destructive typhoon
steals personal property from the demolished houses
In People vs. Penjan, the chaotic condition resulting
from liberation of San Pablo was considered a
calamity.
Not Appreciated
- The development of engine trouble at sea
- Liberation of the Philippines during the last World
War
Para (8). That the crime be committed with the aid of
(1) armed men, or (2) persons who insure or afford
impunity.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
the means and ways employed in the commission of
the crime
Requisites:
1. That the armed men or persons took part in
the commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly
2. That the accused availed himself of their aid
or relied upon them when the crime was
committed
Not aggravating
*The casual presence of armed men near the place
where the crime was committed
*When the offender did not avail himself of their aid
or rely upon them to commit the crime
Exceptions:
1. When both the attacking party and the party
attacked were equally armed
2. When the accused as well as those who
cooperated with him in the commission of the
crime acted under the same plan and for the
same purpose
By a Band vs. Aid of Armed Men
By a band
Aid of Armed
Men
Requires more
At least 2 armed
than 3 armed
men
As to the #
malefactors or
at least 4.
Degree of
All principals
Mere
participation
accomplices
*”Aid of armed” men is abosed by “employment of a
band”
*Aid of armed woman is aggravating in kidnapping
and serious illegal detention
Para (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.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
his inclination to crimes
Requisites:
1. That the offender is on trial for an offense
2. That he was previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime
3. That both the first and the second offenses
are embraced in the same title of the Code
4. That the offender is convicted of the new
offense
What is controlling: The time of the trial, not the time
of the commission of the crime. It is not required that
at the time of the commission of the crime, the
accused should have been previously convicted by
final judgment of another crime.
Lois :))
At the time of the trial—it should be strictly
construed as to mean the date of arraignment.
- Rendering of the judgment
- Meant to include everything that is done in the
course of the trial, from arraignment until after
sentence is announced by the judge in open court
Not appreciated:
*The accused was convicted of robbery with homicide
committed on Dec. 23, 1947. He was previously
convicted of theft committed on Dec. 30, 1947.
- No recidivism if the subsequent conviction
is for an offense committed before the
offense involved in the prior conviction.
A prosecuted and tried for theft, estafa, and robbery.
Judgments for the 3 offenses were read on the same
day. Is he a recidivist? No, because the judmgnet in
any of the first 2 offenses was not yet final when he
was tried for the 3rd offense.
Sec 7 of Rule 120 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure provides that except where the death
penalty is imposed, a judgment in a criminal case
becomes final:
1. After the lapse of the period for perfecting an
appeal; or
2. When the sentence has been partially or
totally satisfied or served; or
3. The accused has waived in writing his right to
appeal; or
4. The accused has applied for probation
Sec 6 of Rule 122 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure provides that “an appeal must be taken
within 15 days from promulgation or notice of the
judgment or order appealed from.”
*The present crime and the previous crime must be
embraced in the same title of this Code.
- When an offense is punishable by an ordinance or
special law and the other by the Revised Penal
Code, the two offenses are not embraced in the
same title of the Code.
Not appreciated:
1. Robbery with homicide, which is crime against
property, and homicide, which is crime against
persons
2. Rape (crime against persons) and acts of
lasciviousness (crimes against chastity)
3. Estafa (crime against property) and
falsification (crime against public interest)
4. Felony under the RPC and offense under
special criminal law for obvious reason could
not fall under the same title of the RPC
Appreciated:
*Usury case where the accused was previously
convicted of the same offense
- Usury is the illegal action or practice of lending
money at unreasonably high rates of interest.
Under Art. 10 of the RPC should be deemed as
supplementing special laws of a penal character.
Crimes embraced in the same title of the RPC
Crimes against Crimes against
Property
Persons
Title 10
Title 8
Robbery and
Homicide and
Theft
Physical
Injuries
*Even if the lapse of time between two felonies is
more than 10 years
Pardon does not obliterate the fact that the accused
was a recidivist, therefore it does not prevent a former
conviction from being considered as an aggravating
circumstance.
Amnesty extinguishes the penalty and its effects
Para (10). 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.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as show by
his inclination to crimes
Requisites:
1. That the accused is on trial for an offense;
2. That he previously served sentence for
another offense to which the law attaches an
equal or greater penalty, or for two or more
crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty
than that for the new offense; and
Lois :))
3. That the is convicted of the new offense.
In reiteracion or habituality, it is essential that the
offender be previously punished, that is, he has served
sentence, for offense in which the law attaches, or
provides for an equal or greater penalty than that
attached by law to the second offense, or for two or
more offenses, in which the law attaches a lighter
penalty.
“Has been previously punished”—that the accused
previously served sentence for another offense or
sentences for other offenses his trial for the new
offense.
The second penalty is present:
1. When the 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
3. When the accused served at least two
sentences even if the penalties provided by
law for the crimes are lighter.
*It is the penalty to the offense, not the penalty
actually imposed
*It is not always aggravating
- If as a result of taking this circumstance into account,
the penalty for the crime of murder would be death
and the offenses for which the offender has been
previously convicted are against property and not
directly against persons, the court should exercise its
discretion in favor of the accused by not taking this
aggravating circumstance into account.
RECIDIVISM
The previous crime
and the present
crime are embraced
in the same Title of
the Revised Penal
Code
Requires that the
offenses be included
in the same title of
the Code
REITERACION
It is necessary that
the offender shall
have served out his
sentence for the first
offense
The previous and
subsequent offenses
must not be
embraced in the
Always be taken into
consideration in
fixing the penalty to
be imposed upon the
accused
same title of the
Code
Not always
aggravating
4 FORMS OF REPETITION:
1. Recidivism (Art. 14 (9))—generic
2. Reiteracion or habituality (Art. 14, (10))—
generic
3. Multi-recidivism or habitual delinquency (Art.
62 (5))—extraordinary
4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) – special
Habitual delinquency—when a person, within period
of 10 years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification,
is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
oftener.
In habitual delinquency, the offender is either a
recidivist or one who has been previously punished for
two or more offenses (habituality). He shall suffer an
additional penalty for being a habitual delinquent.
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 the same, shall be punished by the maximum
of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony.
Para (11). That the crime be committed in
consideration of a price, reward or promise.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
the motivating power itself.
Requisites:
1. There must be two or more principals
a. One who gives or offers price or
promise
b. One who accepts it
2. Price, reward or promise must be for the
purpose of inducing another to perform the
deed
The price, reward or promise need not:
Lois :))
1. Consist of or refer to material things; or
2. Be actually delivered; it being sufficient that
the offer made by the principal inducement
was accepted by the principal by direct
participation before the commission of the
offense.
Is this paragprah applicable to the one who gave the
price or reward?
- When this aggravating circumstance is present, it
affects not only the person who received the price
or the reward, but also the person who gave it.
*The aggravating circumstance that the crime was
committed for hire or reward can be applied to the
instigator of the crime.
*If the price, reward, or promise is alleged in the
information as a qualifying circumstance, it shall be
considered against all the accused, it being an element
of the crime of murder.
*Price, reward or promise must be for the purpose of
inducing another to perform the deed.
Not Appreciated:
*If the principal actor committed the crime for
another reason, and the price, reward or
consideration is offered for another purpose
*If the principal actors are already decided to commit
the crime when the reward was offered.
Para (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.
Type: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by
the means and ways employed
Requisites:
- Crimes was committed by means of:
1. Inundation
2. Fire
3. Poison
4. Explosion
5. Stranding of a vessel; or
6. Intentional damage to a vessel
7. Derailment of a locomotive
8. By use of any other artifice involving great
waste and ruin
Unless used by the offender as a means to
accomplish a criminal purpose, any of the
circumstances in paragraph 12 cannot be considered
to increase the penalty or to change the nature of
the offense.
As generic aggravating circumstance.
A killed his wife by means of fire, as when he set their
house on fire to kills her; or by means of explosion, as
when he threw a hand grenade at her to kill her; or by
means of poison which he mixed with the food of his
wife. In any of these cases, there is only a generic
aggravating circumstance, because they cannot qualify
the crime. The crime committed is parricide which is
already qualified by relationship.
When another aggravating circumstance already
qualifies the crime, any of these aggravating
circumstances shall be considered as generic
aggravating circumstances only.
*When there is no actual design to kill a person in
burning a house, it is plain arson even if a person is
killed.
*If the offender had the intent to kill the victim, such
that burned the house where the latter was, and the
victim died as a consequence, the crime is murder,
qualified by the circumstance that the crime
committed “by means of fire”.
*When used as a means to kill another person, the
crime is murder.
(1) By means of fire
*In order to constitute 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.
- If the purpose of the fire is to kill a
predetermined person, the crime
committed is murder.
- Once it is alleged in the information to
qualify the offense, it should not be
considered as generic aggravating
circumstance for the purpose of
increasing the penalty, because it is an
integral element of the offense.
Lois :))
-
If the house as set on fire after the killing
of the victim, there would be two sepate
crimes of arson and murder or homicide.
(2) By means of explosion
*No intent to kill—crime involving destruction, but the
penalty will be death.
*There’s intent to kill—murder
(3) By means of derailment of locomotive
1. Damage to means of communication (Art.
330)—crime is committed as a result of
derailment of cars only property is damaged.
2. Complex crime of damage to means of
communication—the death of a person also
results without intent to kill on the part of the
offender.
3. Murder (because the derailment of cars or
locomotive was the means used to kill the
victim)—if the death of a person resulted and
there was intent to kill on the part of the
offender
4. If it already qualifies the crime to murder, this
aggravating circumstance will not be
considered—why? Beause Art. 62, para. 1,
provides that when the aggravating
circumstance is included by the law in defining
the crime, it shall not be taken into
consideration for the purpose of increasing
the penalty.
Para 7
Para 12
Crime is committed on Crimes committed by
the occasion of a
means of any of such
calamity or
act involving great
misfortune.
waste or ruin
Lois :))