Even after arraignment, voluntary confession can still be mitigating, when with the consent of the public prosecutor, there is an amendment in the information = still voluntary confession (as was held in the midterms)
Voluntary confession is usually done during arraignment
What has been admitted need not be proven by evidence; judgment can already be rendered but both sides can still present evidence to prove aggravating or mitigating circumstances
Arraignment – charges are being read to the accused in open court in a language known to him; if the charges are read in a language not known to him, the arraignment or plea is void.
It is the duty of courts to read charges in a language known to him
Promulgation – physical and actual reading of the sentence to the accused - can be limited to just the dispositive portion (the “wherefore” clause)
- if there is an acquittal, the decision is final and executory and not appeallable because of the risk of double jeopardy
- if there is a conviction, the accused has 15 days to avail of legal remedies, if not availed after, the conviction becomes final and executory
Basis for mitigation: lesser perversity of the offender
Q: How many MC? two
1) Voluntary surrender- Ordinary (not generic) 2) Voluntary confession of guilt
Paragraphs 3 to 10 are all ordinary mitigating Reason for considering voluntary surrender mitigating?
1. Act of repentance and 2 respect for law, and
3. saves time, resources and energy for his search and capture
To whom must VS be done?
Person-in-authority, Define (p.305) Agent
e.g. of P-I-A
Brgy. Chairman City Mayor Judge, Governor
Prosecutor, Congressman President, Professors, Teachers Agents
Police officers Members of AFP Brgy. Tanods NBI agents Sheriffs
Killd neighbor, surrender to Amurao, voluntary surrender? Yes.
Board members of GSIS? Yes.
Of Landbank? Yes.
DBP? Yes.
SSS? Yes.
PAGCOR? Yes.
Q: Supposing accused after killing neighbour just stayed in his house. When police officers arrived, went with them voluntarily- mit? No.
Voluntary surrender not synonymous with non-flight.
Direct, positive, unequivocal act showing an intention to submit himself voluntarily either save the govt from the time and expenses or as a sign of acknowledgment of guilt or repentance (Amurao)
Offender on radio that he was #1 suspect in slaying of politician, he came to the police to clear his name, he has a pending case for rape. Voluntary surrender? No.
Will surrender only if
1) He is given special treatment 2) ref
3) aircon
Voluntary surrender? No.
After committing crime, accused went into hiding. He was found after several months. Hiding place surrounded by authorities.
He came out saying I surrender. VS?
No ( Internal) Meaning of spontaneous.
Voluntary Confession –Par. 10 of Art.14.
A case for homicide filed against accused in Batanes. Upon learning, the accused hiding in Tawi-tawi surrendered to Brgy. Chairman of Tawi-tawi?
Yes. Place of surrender not significant. It need not be the place where the case is filed.
Q: Phil. Ambassador to Australia, if accused is in Australia upon learning of the case filed? Yes.
Q: If surrendered to Australian Prime Minister? No, not a P-I-A or agent under the Phil laws Q: On the way to the police precinct, was apprehended? Yes.
Q: Did not offer resistance? No.
Q: Issued warrant, surrendered to Brgy. Tanod? Yes.
Even if warrant is already issued? Yes, as long as not served.
10 months after issuance, surrendered? No. No longer spontaneous.
Surrender to mother-in-law? No.
Q: Requisites of VCG:
Competent court- meaning?
Court trying the case
Open court- meaning? Even if doors are closed?
Yes.
Reason behind VCG? Act of repentance, Acknowledgment of guilt
Accused willing to plead guilty with condition Ref, aircon, computer set? No.
When to plead? Arraignment.
Pre-trial? (There is presentation of witnesses, documents, and gist of testimony) After inspection of evidence and conclusion, the evidence against him is strong.
Stages Arraignment Pre-trial Trial
ONLY SUBMISSION, NOT PRESENTATION
Prosec presented 1st eyewitness, clear & convicning testimony
After 1st witness, concluding that he would be convicted , withdrew guilty plea. Mitigating? No.
N.B. NOT prior to “termination”
Witness only sworn-in, no testimony yet mitigating? Yes.
Amend info to a lesser offense w/o protest willing to plea guilty, mitigating? Yes.
Article 13(8) – Deafness and Dumbness
- must restrict the means of action, defense or communication with others
Basis for mitigation: offender does not have complete freedom of action; diminution of freedom and voluntariness
Bald? No.
Blind? Yes.
Partial blindness? Yes.
Deaf by one ear? Yes.
Crippled? Yes.
Toothless? Yes!
When must the physical defect be present? At the time of the commission of the crime.
ORDINARY MIT.
Legal effects.
Article 13(9) – Illness
- the offender has diminished exercise of willpower; loss of willpower may even be exempting - deprivation of consciousness
Basis for mitigation: diminution of intelligence and intent
Accused prosecuted for simple theft (shoplifting in a mall)
During trial, it was proved that he was a kleptomaniac. Mitigating? Yes.
If prosecuted for frustrated homicide?
No, not related to the offense committed.
Accused prosecuted for rape. During trial proved to be sex maniac, Mitigating? Yes.
NO CONTROL OF THEIR OWN WILL AS FAR AS THE OFFENSE IS CONCERNED
Same fact-sex maniac. Prosecuted for Robbery? No.
Article 13(10) – Other Analogous Circumstances Example?
Blind, 60 years old-70 years of age Restitution- voluntary surrender.
Creditor, debtor.
Running away and refuses to pay.
Victim brought to the hospital for treatment- voluntary surrender.
Giving victim a certain amount for…- voluntary confession.
Jealousy. You saw your girlfriend walking hand-in-hand with another man, you inflicted physical injuries?
Passion or obfuscation.
Other mit. Circ. In the RPC?
Infanticide or abortion to conceal disgrace or dishonor.
Adultery- there is abandonment by the offended party. (Unjustified)
Article 14
Q: What are aggravating circumstances?
- those if present, are not automatically offset by mitigating circumstances
- may increase the penalty provided by the law without exceeding the maximum penalty or it changes the nature of the crime
- Classification:
1. Generic – those that generally apply to all crimes, eg. Recidivism, Aid of Minors, Advantage taken by Public Position, etc
2. Specific – those that apply to particular crimes, eg. Ignominy, Treachery
3. Qualifying – Those that change the nature of the crime, eg. Treachery, Evident Premeditation, Cruelty, etc.
4. Inherent – necessity accompanies the commission of the crime, eg. sex is inherent in crimes against chastity
Difference between Generic and Qualifying
GENERIC QUALIFYING
- can be offset by an ordinary - cannot be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance mitigating circumstance
- the legal effect is to increase - it changes the nature of the crime the penalty to the maximum - give the crime its proper and exclusive without exceeding the limit name
Both qualifying and generic circumstances must be alleged in the information; the prosecution can’t prove an aggravating circumstance during trial (p.326 #3 in the comparison part in the Reyes book is wrong)
Article 14(1) – Advantage Taken of Public Position - a generic aggravating circumstance
- based on Republic Act 7659, in crimes committed by a public officer, the penalty prescribed by law is always at the maximum, regardless of the mitigating circumstances presented and regardless of the nature of these mitigating circumstances
Public Officer – for advantage taken to be appreciated, s/he must use the influence, prestige or ascendancy which his office gives him as the means by which s/he realizes his purpose.
There should be a deliberate intent to use the influence, prestige or ascendancy
Is it enough that the offender is a public officer? NO, he has to use the influence, prestige or ascendancy given to him by his office
Supposing, a police officer enters the house then ties up the residents and robs them, can the aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position be appreciated? YES
Supposing, a traffic enforcer take over the car of a driver and speeds away, he is convicted of robbery, can the aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position be appreciated? YES
Supposing some members of the barangay council asked for financial sponsorship for the education of the community, then the project turned out to be false, can the aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position be appreciated? YES
Supposing, if these crimes were attendant of negligence, passion or obfuscation, vindication, or sufficient provocation, can the aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position be appreciated? NO, because these circumstances are incompatible with advantage taken of public position since deliberate intent is absent in these instances.
Supposing, a police investigator asked a rape victim to enter a room where he committed acts of lasciviousness on the rape victim, can the aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position be appreciated? YES
The aggravating circumstance of advantage taken of public position is NOT appreciated when the public position is an integral element or inherent in the offense; In the ff crimes, public position is inherent:
- bribery - malversation of public funds - indirect bribery - falsification of public documents
- RA 3019 - other crimes against public officers under the RPC
Basis for the aggravation: the greater perversity of (1) personal circumstances of the offender, and (2) means used to secure commission of the crime
Article 14(2) – Contempt or Insult to Public Authorities - Requisites:
1. the public authority is engaged in the exercise of his official functions