Is the aggravating circumstance of Evident Premeditation compatible with the mitigating circumstance Immediate Vindication of a Relative for a Grave Offense? YES, the mitigating circumstance and aggravating circumstance can be appreciated.
Can evident premeditation be present in error in personae? NO
Can evident premeditation be present in aberratio ictus? NO
Supposing, you intended to kill Prof. Amurao, thinking it was him, you shot at the person, who turned out to be Dean Jara, can the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation be appreciated? NO, because there should be deliberate intent to kill Dean Jara
General rule: In aberratio ictus, evident premeditation is NOT applicable
Exception: if there was a general plan to kill anyone; if offenders intended to kill anyone
Basis for aggravation: reference to the ways of committing the crime because evident premeditation implies deliberate planning of the act before executing it
Elements: 4
Classification – qualifying Legal effects?
Incompatible with negligence, spur of the moment, accidental meeting, p/o, sp Vindication of grave offense? Yes
Error in personae -general rule: No
Except: if there is a general plan
Accused has a specific victim but willing to kill a person who interfered. Yes Abberatio ictus: No
Article 14(14) – Craft, Fraud, Disguise
- that (1) craft, (2) fraud, (3) disguise be employed
- this paragraph contemplates THREE aggravating circumstances
- a qualifying aggravating circumstance = cannot be offset by a mitigating; CHANGES THE NATURE OF THE CRIME
Craft – involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of accused
Supposing, the accused pretended to be a customer, then he robbed the place, can the aggravating circumstance of craft be appreciated? YES
Supposing the accused pretended to be a person in authority, for example posing as Meralco officials, then they commit a crime, can the aggravating circumstance of craft be appreciated? YES
Fraud – insidious words or machinations used to induce the victim
Fraudulent machinations and grave abuse of authority will be absorbed in the crime of rape
Fraud is inherent in the crime of estafa
Disguise – resorting to any device to conceal identity
Examples:
- wearing a mask - use of an assumed name - wearing a uniform of a police officer
Q: Craft definition
It is Qualifying-legal effects
Example: A, B, C in order to kill D, told the latter they are going on camping, killed D in the forest
Fraud
Qualifying- legal effects Estafa-legal effect of fraud
It is inherent in the commission of estafa inherent in Art. 213 Disguise
When is there disguise?
Qualifying-legal effect
Example: Several members of Bonnet Gang committed robbery in the highway
Basis of aggravation: means employed
Article 14(15) – Abuse of Superior Strength/Means to Weaken Defense
- that (1) advantage be taken of superior strength or (2) means be employed to weaken the defense - this paragraph contemplates TWO aggravating circumstances
- a qualifying aggravating circumstance = cannot be offset by a mitigating; CHANGES THE NATURE OF THE CRIME
- there should be deliberate intent to take advantage of superior strength
Abuse of Superior Strength – depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties; it is considered whenever there is notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assessing a superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor which is selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime
If the victim was alternately attacked, there is NO abuse of superior strength
Means to Weaken the Defense
Supposing, the offender intoxicated the victim to materially weaken her, can the aggravating circumstance of means to weaken defense be appreciated? YES
Article 14(16) – Treachery (Alevosia)
- a specific aggravating circumstance: only applicable to crimes against persons; can treachery be appreciated in rape? YES
- a qualifying aggravating circumstance = cannot be offset by a mitigating; CHANGES THE NATURE OF THE CRIME
- this circumstance is not applicable to cases involving accidents, accidental meetings, chance encounters, or spurs of the moment, or on-the-spot decisions to commit the crime
- this circumstance is not applicable to cases attendant of negligence or carelessness
- not applicable to cases attendant of passion or obfuscation or those with sufficient provocation Treachery
When is there treachery
Qualifying and specific- crimes against person Qualifying-change the nature of the crime
Incompatible with negligence, sufficient provocation, passion or obfuscation
Can co-exist with voluntary confession of guilt? Yes. With voluntary surrender? Yes. They are not inconsistent with…
BUT IS IT STILL ACCURATE THAT THIS QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE CANNOT BE OFFSET BY ANY MITIGATING CIRC? Yes. Different functions. One is to change the nature of the felony. (AGG) Other is to reduce penalty by one period after the offense is qualified (MIT)
Does a privileged mit. Circ. Offset a qualifying aggravating? NO.
-Function of qualifying agg. Circ. Is to change the nature of the offense for which the accused stands to be prosecuted.
-Role of privilege mitigating circ. Is to reduce the penalty by one or two degrees as the case may be from the proper penalty imposed on the offense as qualified.
Can co-exist with vindication for a grave offense? Yes.
Kill neighbor
W/o treachery- Homicide (reclusion temporal) w/ treachery- Murder (reclusion perpetua to death) with 1 mit circ. (RP in medium, RP in minimum) with 1 priv. mit circ. RT (one degree lower from RT)
Treachery can be appreciated in RAPE? Yes, crime against persons.
In a prosecution for rape, by treachery and abuse of superior strength or craft, fraud, disguise- absorbed in treachery
In prosecution for MURDER qualified by treachery and evident premeditation. Can EP be appreciated so as to increase penalty in maximum? NO. absorbed in treachery.
Same with inundation, fire, poison, explosion, price, reward or promise.
Aid of armed men, persons who afford impunity, nighttime, calamities or misfortune.
ALL QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRC. Enumerated in People vs. Palaganas can be absorbed by treachery.
Supposing you killed your neighbor with evident premeditation and employed means to weaken defense and used disguise and took advantage of deep flood. How many qualifying? 4
Assuming there was treachery, how many? 5
Is it necessary for the court to consider all 5 to change the nature of the felony? No. Treachery will suffice.
Now, what will happen to the other 4 aggravating circ? Deemed absorbed in treachery. They can no longer be appreciated to impose penalty in the maximum.
TESTS in TREACHERY.
1. Is the attack sudden and unexpected?
2. Was the victim given an opportunity for defense?
3. Was the means employed deliberate and consciously adopted? (3rd test is the most important.) Incompatible with casual encounter- even if 1 and 2 were present, if 3 is lacking, there is no treachery.
Incompatible with accidental meeting- spur of the moment.
Incompatibel if killing was preceded by a heated argument. (place the victim on guard to be prepared for any attack)
Entering carpark, vacant lot
Another vehicle hurrying towards the slot. You got in first. There was a heated argument. He warned you, Babalikan kita. After two minutes shot you. Was there treachery? None.
If killing was preceded by threat, treachery? No.
Lacking question no. 2.
When attack consists of 2 or more stages
Aggression is interrupted- fatal blow-there was treachery Continuing-treachery must be present at the inception Example of #1 (see green notebook)
A saw his enemy B
w/o any warning from behind, inflicted stab wounds.
B was able to avoid. Open fight followed, B fled.
A immediatelt behind, stabbed B. B died. Was there treachery? None. Treachery was not consciously adopted at the inception and the aggression being continuing.
Example of #2. People v. Canete, US vs. Baluyot
A sa B in a bar. A challenged his enemy B in a fight. They fought inside the bar. A hit B in the back by pipe, B died. What crime? Homicide only. Chance encounter, not treachery.
Accused found to be intoxicated under influence of drugs? MURDER. Influence of illegal drugs qualifies crime from homicide to murder. (RA 9165 Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
Supposing victim warned not to enter a certain area while walking along the road, somebody stabbed him from behind, treachery? YES. General warning is not enough to remove treachery.
Is the aggravating circumstance of Treachery compatible with the mitigating circumstance Immediate Vindication of a Relative for a Grave Offense? YES, because there was intent to take revenge
Rules regarding Treachery