AGGRAVATING

CIRCUMSTANCES
ART. 14, REVISED PENAL CODE
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

 THEY ARE CALLED AGGRAVATING BECAUSE IT AFFECTS THE PENALTY AND

NATURE OF THE FELONY COMMITTED BY INCREASING THE PENALTY PROVIDED
FOR BY LAW OR BY CHANGING THE NATURE OF A FELONY FROM ONE TO
ANOTHER
 PURSUANT TO THE REVISED RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, EVERY
COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION MUST STATE NOT ONLY THE QUALIFYING BUT
ALSO THE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
 IF NOT ALLEGED, IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE PENALTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED.
HOWEVER, THE SAME MAY STILL BE CONSIDERED IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES
THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY
THE OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC
POSITION
THIS IS BASED ON THE GREATER PERVERSITY OF THE OFFENDER DUE TO
THE PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENDER AS WELL AS THE
MEANS TO SECURE THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 APPLICABLE ONLY WHEN THE OFFENDER IS A PUBLIC OFFICER
 ADVANTAGE, IN THIS SENSE, MEANS THAT THE PUBLIC OFFICER MUST
USE THE INFLUENCE, PRESTIGE OR ASCENDANCY WHICH THE OFFICE
GIVES HIM AS THE MEANS BY WHICH HE REALIZES HIS PURPOSE
 IF THE ACCUSED COULD HAVE PERPETRATED THE CRIME WITHOUT
OCCUPYING A POLICE POSITION THEN THE AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE WILL NOT APPLY
THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN
CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO
THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
 BASED ON THE GREATER PERVERSITY OF THE OFFENDER, AS SHOWN BY HIS LACK OF
RESPECT FOR THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
 PUBLIC AUTHORITY OR A PERSON IN AUTHORITY IS A PUBLIC OFFICER WHO IS DIRECTLY
VESTED WITH JURISDICTION OR A PUBLIC OFFICER WHO HAS THE POWER TO GOVERN AND
EXECUTE THE LAWS
 THE CRIME IN ITSELF MUST NOT BE COMMITTED AGAINST THE PUBLIC AUTHORITY
 THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WILL NOT APPLY IF THE CRIME IS COMMITTED IN THE PRESENCE OF
AN AGENT ONLY
 AGENT OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY IS 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 PROTECTION AND SECURITY OF LIFE AND PROPERTY
OR ANY PERSON WHO COMES TO THE AID OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
 ACT IS COMMITTED WITH OR IN
DISREGARD OF RESPECT…….
 THIS IS BASED ON THE GREATER PERVERSITY OF THE OFFENDER, AS SHOWN BY THE
PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENDED PARTY AND THE PLACE OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 APPLIES ONLY TO CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS OR HONOR
 WITH INSULT OR DISREGARD MEANS THAT THERE MUST BE DELIBERATE INTENT TO
OFFEND OR INSULT THE SEX OR AGE OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
 THERE MUST BE PROOF OF THE SPECIFIC FACT OR CIRCUMSTANCE IN ORDER TO
APPRECIATE THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
 DWELLING IN RELATION TO
PREVIOUS SLIDE
 RELATIONSHIP OF THE OFFENDER, THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME AS WELL AS THE PLACE
OF THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE
 IT IS CONSIDERED AS AN AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE OF THE SANCTITY OF
PRIVACY BY THE LAW ACCORDS TO HUMAN ABODE
 WHAT MAKES DWELLING AN AC IS THE ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE WHICH THE OFFENDED
PARTY REPOSED IN THE OFFENDER BY OPENING THE DOOR TO HIM OR
 THE VIOLATION OF THE SANCTITY OF THE HOME BY TRESPASSING THEREIN WITH VIOLENCE
OF AGAINST THE WILL OF THE OWNER
 IT IS NOT REQUIRED THAT THE OFFENDER ACTUALLY ENTERS THE DWELLING IN ORDER TO
APPRECIATE THIS AC. IT IS ENOUGH THAT THE VICTIM WAS ATTACKED INSIDE HIS OWN
HOUSE (PEOPLE VS OMPAID JANUARY 31, 1969)
 EVEN IF THE KILLING TOOK PLACE OUTSIDE THE DWELLING, IT IS AGGRAVATING PROVIDED
THAT THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE BEGAN IN THE DWELLING
THE ACT IS COMMITTED WITH ABUSE
OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS
UNGRATEFULNESS
 THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE OFFENDER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS EMPLOYED IN THE
COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE
 THE CIRCUMSTANCE EXISTS ONLY WHEN THE OFFENDED PARTY HAS TRUSTED THE
OFFENDER WHO LATER ABUSES SUCH TRUST BY COMMITTING THE CRIME
 THIS CIRCUMSTANCE WILL NOT BE APPRECIATED WHERE THE ACCUSED AND THE
DECEASED HAPPENS TO BE TOGETHER DUE TO THE FORMER’S INVITATION
 THE CONFIDENCE BETWEEN THE OFFENDER AND THE OFFENDED MUST BE IMMEDIATE
AND PERSONAL. IT IS INHERENT IN MALVERSATION, ESTAFA, QUALIFIED THEFT AND
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
 UNGRATEFULNESS MUST BE OBVIOUS
CRIME BE COMMITTED AT
NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE,
BY
 A BAND
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ACT OF THE OFFENDER AND THE TIME AND PLACE OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME AND THE MEANS AND WAYS INVOLVED
 THESE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE TREATED SEPARATELY FROM ONE ANOTHER
 THESE AC MUST FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME AND MUST BE
ESPECIALLY SOUGHT FOR BY THE OFFENDER TO INSURE THE COMMISSION OF THE
CRIME OR FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPUNITY
 NIGHT TIME MAY FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME WHEN 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
 FOR THE PURPOSE OF IMPUNITY MEANS TO PREVENT THE ACCUSED FROM BEING
RECOGNIZED OR TO SECURE HIS NON DETECTION AND PUNISHMENT
 NIGHTTIME

 THE TERM SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD TO BE THE PERIOD OF DARKNESS BEGINNING AT

END OF DUSK AND ENDING AT DAWN
 TO BE AGGRAVATING, 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 COMMISSION OF THE CRIME MUST BEGIN AND BE ACCOMPLISHED AT NIGHTTIME
 THE OFFENSE MUST BE ACTUALLY BE COMMITTED IN THE DARKNESS OF THE NIGHT
 WHEN THE PLACE OF THE CRIME IS ILLUMINATED BY LIGHT, NIGHTTIME IS NOT
AGGRAVATING
 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
 IT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED WHEN THE PLACE WHERE THE CRIME WAS COMMITTED
COULD BE SEEN AND THE VOICE OF THE DECEASED COULD BE HEARD FROM A NEARBY
HOUSE
 THE TEST TO DETERMINE WHETHER UNINHABITED PLACE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IS
WHETHER OR NOT IN THE PLACE OF THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE THERE WAS A
REASONABLE POSSIBILITY OF THE VICTIM RECEIVING SOME HELP
 SOLITUDE MUST BE SOUGHT TO BETTER ATTAIN THE CRIMINAL PURPOSE
 BAND
 COMMISSION BY A BAND MEANS MORE THAN THREE ARMED MALEFACTORS ACTING
TOGETHER IN THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE
 THE BAND MUST BE COMPOSED OF MORE THAN THREE ARMED MALEFACTORS. IF THERE
ARE 20 PERSONS, BUT ONLY 2 OF THEM ARE ARMED, THEN THIS AC CAN NOT BE
APPRECIATED
 IF ONE OF THE FOUR ARMED MALEFACTORS IS A PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT, THERE IS
NO BAND
 THE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH AND USE OF
FIRE ARMS IS ABSORBED IN THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
CRIME IS COMMITTED ON THE
OCCASION OF A CALAMITY OR
MISFORTUNE
 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ACT OF THE OFFENDER AND THE TIME OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 THE OFFENDER MUST TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE
CRIME COMMITTED IN THE AID OF
ARMED MEN
 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ACT OF THE OFFENDER AND THE MEANS AND WAYS OF
COMMITTING THE CRIME
 THE ARMED MEN MUST TAKE PART DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY IN THE COMMISSION
OF THE CRIME
 THE AID OF ARMED MEN IS PRESENT EVEN IF ONLY ONE OF THE OFFENDERS MERELY
RELIED ON THEIR AID
 RECIDIVISM

 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE OFFENDER AND HIS INCLINATION TO CRIMES

 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 THE RPC
 WHAT IS CONTROLLING IS THE TIME OF 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
 AT THE TIME OF THE TRIAL INCLUDES THE RENDERING OF THE JUDGMENT AND
EVERYTHING THAT IS DONE IN THE COURSE OF THE TRIAL, FROM ARRAIGNMENT
UNTIL AFTER THE SENTENCE IS ANNOUNCED BY THE JUDGE IN OPEN COURT
 SECTION 7, RULE 120 OF THE REVISED RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PROVIDES
THAT THERE IS A FINAL JUDGMENT WHEN
 AFTER THE LAPSE OF THE PERIOD FOR PERFECTING AN APPEAL
 WHEN THE SENTENCE HAS BEEN PARTIALLY OR TOTALLY SATISFIED OR SERVED
 THE ACCUSED HAS WAIVED IN WRITING HIS RIGHT TO APPEAL
 ACCUSED HAS APPLIED FOR PROBATION
 RECIDIVISM
 THE PRESENT CRIME AND THE PREVIOUS CRIME SHOULD BE EMBRACED UNDER THE
SAME TITLE OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE
 IF ONE OFFENSE IS PUNISHABLE BY AND ORDINANCE OR SPECIAL LAW AND THE OTHER
BY THE REVISED PENAL CODE, THE TWO OFFENSES ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS
EMBRACED UNDER THE SAME TITLE OF THE CODE
 EXAMPLES OF OFFENSES PUNISHABLE UNDER THE SAME TITLE OF THE CODE:
 ROBBERY AND THEFT (CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY)
 HOMICIDE AND PHYSICAL INJURIES (CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS)
 HOMICIDE AND MURDER (CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS)
 THE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF RECIDIVISM CAN STILL BE APPRECIATED
REGARDLESS OF THE PERIOD WHEN THE FIRST OFFENSE WAS COMMITTED
 PARDON DOES NOT OBLITERATE THIS TYPE OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE AS
PARDON DOES NOT EXTINGUISH THE FACT THAT AN ACCUSED WAS A RECIDIVIST
 REITERACION
 ELEMENTS
 THE ACCUSED IS ON TRIAL FOR AN OFFENSE
 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 A LIGHTER PENALTY THAN THAT FOR THE NEW OFFENSE
 THAT HE IS CONVICTED OF THE NEW OFFENSE
 IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT THE OFFENDER BE PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED, THAT IS, HE SERVED
SENTENCE, FOR AN 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
EXAMPLE OF REITERACION

 THE ACCUSED ONCE SERVED SENTENCE FOR HOMICIDE

(PUNISHABLE BY A PENALTY RANGING FROM 12 YRS AND 1 DAY TO
20 YRS). AFTER RELEASE, HE COMMITTED FALSIFICATION AND WAS
CONVICTED FOR A PERIOD RANGING FROM 6 YRS AND 1 DAY TO 12
YRS. THERE IS REITERACION BECAUSE THE FIRST OFFENSE,
PUNISHABLE BY 12 YRS AND 1 DAY TO 20 YRS, IS GREATER THAN THE
PENALTY FOR THE 2ND OFFENSE WHICH IS 6 YRS AND 1 DAY TO 12 YRS
RECIDIVISM VS REITERACION
RECIDIVISM
 IT IS ENOUGH THAT A FINAL
JUDGMENT HAS BEEN RENDERED
IN THE FIRST OFFENSE
 REQUIRES THAT THE OFFENSES BE
INCLUDED UNDER THE SAME
TITLE OF THE REVISED PENAL
CODE
 ALWAYS TAKEN INTO
CONSIDERATION IN FIXING THE
PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED UPON
THE ACCUSED
REITERACION
 IT IS NECESSARY THAT THE
OFFENDER SHALL HAVE SERVED
OUT HIS SENTENCE FOR THE FIRST
OFFENSE
 THE PREVIOUS AND SUBSEQUENT
OFFENSES ARE NOT INCLUDED
UNDER THE SAME TITLE OF THE
REVISED PENAL CODE
 NOT ALWAYS AN AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE
HABITUAL DELINQUENCY

 HD EXISTS WHEN A PERSON, WITHIN A PERIOD OF 10 YRS 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 THE SAID
CRIMES A THIRD TIME OR OFTENER
 THE OFFENDER IS EITHER A RECIDIVIST OR ONE WHO HAS BEEN
PREVIOUSLY PUNISHED FOR TWO OR MORE OFFENSES
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 PERIOD OF THE PENALTY PRESCRIBED
BY LAW FOR THE NEW FELONY
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME IS IN
CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD
OR PROMISE
 THERE MUST BE TWO OR MORE PRINCIPALS, THE ONE WHO GIVES OR OFFERS THE
PRICE OR REWARD OR PROMISE AND THE ONE WHO ACCEPTS IT
 THIS PARAGRAPH IS ALSO APPLICABLE TO THE ONE WHO GAVE THE PROMISE OR THE
REWARD
 THE PRICE, PROMISE OR REWARD MUST BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF INDUCING ANOTHER
TO PERFORM THE DEED
 IF WITHOUT PREVIOUS PROMISE IT WAS GIVEN VOLUNTARILY AFTER THE CRIME HAS
BEEN COMMITTED AS AN EXPRESSION OF APPRECIATION FOR THE SYMPATHY AND AID
SHOWN BY THE OTHER ACCUSED, THIS PARAGRAPH SHOULD NOT APPLY
 CRIME WAS COMMITTED BY MEANS
OF INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON ETC
 UNLESS USED BY THE OFFENDER AS A MEANS TO ACCOMPLISH A CRIMINAL PURPOSE, ANY OF THE
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER PAR.12 CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO INCREASE THE PENALTY OR TO
CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE OFFENSE
 WHEN ANOTHER AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE ALREADY QUALIFIES THE CRIME, ANY OF THESE
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS AN AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
ONLY
 EXAMPLE: IF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME IS ALREADY ATTENDED BY THE AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE OF RELATIONSHIP, AS WHEN A KILLED HIS WIFE B BY MEANS OF FIRE, THEN THE
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF BY MEANS OF FIRE WILL ONLY INCREASE THE PENALTY IMPOSED FOR
PARRICIDE
 IF A HOUSE WAS SET ON FIRE AFTER THE VICTIM IS KILLED, THEN 2 SEPARATE CRIMES OF ARSON
AND MURDER/HOMICIDE WILL BE CHARGED AGAINST THE ACCUSED
 THIS PARAGRAPH IS DIFFERENT UNDER PAR.7 BECAUSE UNDER THE LATTER, THE CRIME IS
COMMITTED ON THE OCCASION OF A CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE, WHEREAS UNDER THIS
PARAGRAPH, THE CRIME IS COMMITTED BY ANY OF THE MEANS MENTIONED ABOVE
 CRIME IS COMMITTED WITH
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
 IMPLIES A DELIBERATE PLANNING OF THE ACT BEFORE EXECUTING IT
 THE ESSENCE OF EVIDENT PREMEDITATION IS THAT THE EXECUTION OF THE CRIMINAL
ACT 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 CLAM JUDGMENT
 ABSENT ANY PROOF AS TO HOW AND WHEN THE PLAN TO KILL WAS HATCHED OR WHAT
TIME ELAPSED BEFORE IT WAS CARRIED OUT, EVIDENT PREMEDITATION WILL NOT BE
APPRECIATED
 IF THE PLAN TO PERPETRATE THE CRIME WAS BY VIRTUE OF HOT HEADEDNESS OR A
RISE IN TEMPER, THEN THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE WILL NOT BE APPRECIATED
ELEMENTS OF EVIDENT
PREMEDITATION
 THE TIME WHEN THE OFFENDER DETERMINED TO COMMIT THE CRIME
 AN ACT MANIFESTLY INDICATING THAT THE CULPRIT HAS CLUNG TO HIS
DETERMINATION
 A SUFFICIENT LAPSE OF TIME BETWEEN THE DETERMINATION AND EXECUTION, TO
ALLOW HIM TO REFLECT UPON THE CONSIEQUENCES OF HIS ACT AND TO ALLOW HIS
CONSCIENCE TO OVERCOME THE RESOLUTION OF HIS WILL
 EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
 BY THE TERM ITSELF, THERE MUST BE EVIDENCE SHOWING THAT THE ACCUSED MEDITATED
AND REFLECTED ON HIS INTENTION BETWEEN THE TIME WHEN THE CRIME WAS CONCIEVED
BY HIM AND THE TIME IT WAS ACTUALLY PERPETRATED
 THE PREMEDITATION MUST BE EVIDENT AND NOT MERELY SUSPECTED
 THE DATE AND, IF POSSIBLE, THE TIME WHEN THE OFFENDER DETERMINED TO COMMIT THE
CRIME IS ESSENTIAL, BECAUSE THE LAPSE OF TIME FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE THIRD
REQUISITE IS COMPUTED FROM THAT DATE AND TIME
 THERE MUST BE SUFFICIENT TIME BETWEEN THE OUTWARD ACTS AND THE ACTUAL
COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 WHERE CONSPIRACY IS DIRECTLY ESTABLISHED, WITH PROOF OF THE ATTENDANT
DELIBERATION AND SELECTION OF THE METHOD, TIME AND MEANS OF EXECUTING THE
CRIME, THE EXISTENCE OF EVIDENT PREMEDITATION CAN BE TAKEN FOR GRANTED
 WHEN THE VICTIM IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED, PREMEDITATION IS NOT
AGGRAVATING
 IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THERE IS A PLAN TO KILL A PARTICULAR PERSON
 THAT CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE
BE EMPLOYED
 THE PARAGRAPH IS CHARACTERIZED BY THE INTELLECTUAL OR MENTAL RATHER THAN
THE PHYSICAL MEANS TO WHICH THE CRIMINAL RESORTS TO CARRY OUT HIS PLAN
 CRAFT INVOLVES THE USE ON INTELLECTUAL TRICKERY OR CUNNING ON THE PART OF
THE ACCUSED
 WHERE CRAFT PARTAKES OF AN ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE, THE SAME MAY NOT BE
APPRECIATED INDEPENDENTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF AGGRAVATION
 FRAUD IS THE USE OF INSIDIOUS WORDS OR MACHINATION USED TO INDUCE THE
VICTIM TO ACT IN A MANNER WHICH WOULD ENABLE THE OFFENDER TO CARRY OUT
HIS DESIGN
FRAUD VS CRAFT

FRAUD CRAFT
 A DIRECT INDUCEMENT BY  THE ACT OF THE ACCUSED NOT TO
INSIDIOUS WORDS OR AROUSE SUSPICION
MACHINATION
USE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH OR
EMPLOYMENT OF MEANS TO WEAKEN
THE DEFENSE
 TO USE EXCESSIVE FORCE OUT OF PROPORTION TO THE MEANS OF DEFENSE AVAILABLE TO THE
PERSON ATTACKED
 SUPERIORITY MAY ARISE FROM A PERSON’S GENDER,WEAPON OR NUMBER AS COMPARED TO
THAT OF THE VICTIM
 THERE IS NO ADVANTAGE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH WHEN ONE WHO ATTACKS IS OVERCOME
WITH PASSION OR OBFUSCATION OR WHEN QUARREL AROSE UNEXPECTEDLY AND THE FATAL
BLOW WAS STRUCK WHILE THE VICTIM AND THE ACCUSED WERE ARGUING
 THIS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE IS DIFFERENT FROM “BY A BAND” IN THE SENSE THAT WHAT
COUNTS IN THE LATTER IS THE NUMBER OF AGGRESSORS AND THE FACT THAT THEY ARE ARMED
 BOTH OF THESE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE MUST BE PURPOSELY SOUGHT TO WEAKEN THE
DEFENSE OF THE VICTIM IN RESISTING THE ASSAULT
 THE MEANS USED MUST NOT TOTALLY ELIMINATE POSSIBLE DEFENSE, OTHERWISE, THE SAME
WILL FALL ON TREACHERY
 TREACHERY (ALEVOSIA)
 WHEN THE OFFENSER COMMITS ANY OF THE CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS, 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 OF THE OFFENDED PARTY MIGHT MAKE
 REQUISITES:
 AT THE TIME OF THE ATTACK, THE VICTIM WAS NOT IN THE POSITION TO DEFEND HIMSELF
 THE OFFENDER CONSCIOUSLY ADOPTED THE PARTICULAR MEANS, METHOD OR FORM OF ATTACK
EMPLOYED BY HIM
 TREACHERY CANNOT BE CONSIDERED WHEN THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE
ACCUSED,PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE, RESOLVED TO COMMIT THE
CRIME, OR THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE DEATH OF THE VICTIM WAS THE RESULT OF
MEDITATION,CALCULATION OR REFLECTION
 TREACHERY IS NOT PRESENT WHEN THE ACCUSED GAVE THE DECEASED THE CHANCETO
PREPARE OR THERE WAS A WARNING GIVEN OR THAT IT WAS PRECEDED BY A HEATED
ARGUMENT
 TREACHERY DOES NOT ALWAYS MEAN THAT THE VICTIM HAD HIS BACK TURNED ON THE
OFFENDER. TREACHERY CAN STILL EXIST EVEN IF THE ATTACK IS FACE TO FACE FOR AS
LONG AS THE VICTIM WAS NOT GIVEN THE CHANCE TO DEFEND HIMSELF
 TREACHERY IS ALWAYS PRESENT IN THE KILLING OF THE CHILD
 WHERE THERE IS CONSPIRACY, TREACHERY IS CONSIDERED AGAINST ALL THE
OFFENDERS
 TREACHERY ABSORBS SUPERIOR STRENGTH, AID OF ARMED MEN, BY A BAND AND MEANS
TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE
 TREACHERY IS GENERALLY CHARACTERIZED BY THE DELIBERATE AND SUDDEN
UNEXPECTED ATTACK OF THE VICTIM FROM BEHIND, WITHOUT ANY WARNING AND
WITHOUT GIVING THE VICTIM AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND HIMSELF
 IGNOMINY
 A CIRCUMSTANCE PERTAINING TO THE MORAL ORDER, WHICH ADDS DISGRACE AND
OBLOQUY TO THE MATERIAL INJURY CAUSED BY THE CRIME
 APPLICABLE TO CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY(INCLUDING RAPE), LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES,LIGHT OR GRAVE COERCION, MURDER
 REQUISITES:
 CRIME MUST BE AGAINST CHASTITY, LESS OR SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES, LIGHT OR GRAVE
COERCION AND MURDER
 THE CIRCUMSTANCE MADE THE CRIME MORE HUMILIATING AND SHAMEFUL FOR THE VICTIM
 EXAMPLE: A WOMAN RAPED IN FRONT OF HER HUSBAND, RAPED SUCCESSIVELY BY 5
MEN
 IGNOMINY IS NOT PRESENT WHEN THE VICTIM IS ALREADY DEAD WHEN SUCH ACTS
ACTS ARE COMMITTED AGAINST HIS BOFY OR PERSON
 ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
 THOSE WHICH MUST BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AS EITHER AGGRAVATING OR
MITIGATING ACCORDING TO THE NATURE OF THE CRIME AND OTHER CONDITIONS
ATTENDING ITS COMMISSION
 RELATIONSHIP:
 IT IS MITIGATING IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY, EXCEPT THOSE FALLING UNDER ART.332 OF THE
REVISED PENAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE THEFT, SWINDLING OR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
COMMITTED AGAINST THE OFFENDER’S ASCENDANTS, DESCENDANTS, SPOUSES OR RELATIVES
BY AFFINITY
 RELATIONSHIP IS AGGRAVATING IN CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
 WHEN RELATIONSHIP IS AN ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE, IT IS NEITHER AGGRAVATING NOR
MITIGATING (PARRICIDE, CONCUBINAGE, ADULTERY)
 INTOXICATION:
 IT IS MITIGATING IF IT IS NOT HABITUAL AND IF IT IS NOT SUBSEQUENT TO THE PLAN TO COMMIT
A FELONY
 IT IS AGGRAVATING IF IT IS HABITUAL (ACTUAL AND CONFIRMED) AND IF IT IS INTENTIONAL
 DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION:
 IT IS MITIGATING IF THE DEGREE IS LOW OR THERE IS LACK OF EDUCATION ON THE PART OF
THE OFFENDER
 IT IS AGGRAVATING IF THERE IS A HIGH DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION
 DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION IS NOT MITIGATING IF THE CRIME COMMITTED IS A
CRIME AGAINST PROPERTY, CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY (INCLUDING RAPE) AND CRIME OF
TREASON
 PERSONS WHO ARE CRIMINALLY
LIABLE
 ARTICLE 16 PROVIDES THAT THE FOLLOWING PERSONS ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE
 PRINCIPAL
 ACCOMPLICE
 ACCESSORY
 DETERMINING THE DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION OF AN OFFENDER IS IMPORTANT SINCE THE
IMPOSITION OF THE PENALTY FOR THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME IS DEPENDENT UPON
THE DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION OF A PERSON
 PRINCIPAL

 THOSE WHO TAKE DIRECT PART IN THE EXECUTION OF THE CRIME

 THOSE WHO DIRECTLY FORCE OR INDUCE ANOTHER TO COMMIT A CRIME
 THOSE WHO COOPERATE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE BY ANOTHER ACT
WITHOUT IT WHICH IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED
 PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT
PARTICIPATION
 REQUISITES:
 PARTICIPATION IN CRIMINAL RESOLUTION
 EVERY PERSON WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CRIMINAL RESOLUTION CARRIED OUT THEIR PLAN
AND PERSONALLY TOOK PART IN ITS EXECUTION BY ACTS WHICH DIRECTLY TENDED TO THE
SAME
 CONSPIRACY:
 MUST BE PROVEN BY OVERT ACTS
 NOT MERE KNOWLEDGE NOR APPROVAL
 IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THERE BE A FORMAL AGREEMENT
 MUST BE PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT
 CAN BE PROVEN IMPLIEDLY THROUGH THE COMMON PURPOSE AND UNISON IN EXECUTION BY
THE PERPETRATORS
 THERE IS UNISON IN EXECUTION WHEN:
 SPONTANEOUS AGREEMENT AT THE MOMENT OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 ACTIVE COOPERATION BY ALL THE OFFENDERS IN THE PERPETRATION OF THE CRIME
 CONTRIBUTING BY POSITIVE ACTS TO THE REALIZATION OF A COMMON CRIMINAL INTENT
 PRESENCE DURING THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME BY A BAND AND LENDING MORAL SUPPORT
THERETO
 A CONSPIRATOR IS NOT LIABLE FOR THE CRIMES OF THE OTHER WHICH IS NOT THE
OBJECT OF CONSPIRACY OR IS NOT A LOGICAL NOR NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE
ACT
 THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT AN OFFENSE THROUGH
NEGLIGENCE, UNLESS PROVIDED FOR BY SPECIAL LAWS
 PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT
 A PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION WILL BE LIABLE ONLY IF THE PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT
PARTICIPATION COMMITTED THE ACT INDUCED
 REQUISITES:
 INDUCEMENT IS MADE WITH THE INTENTION OF PROCURING THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
 SUCH INDUCEMENT MUST BE THE DETERMINING CAUSE OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
BY THE MATERIAL EXECUTOR
 FORMS OF INDUCEMENT
 BY PRICE, REWARD OR PROMISE
 BY IRRESISTIBLE FORCE OR UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
 EXERCISING ONE’S ASCENDANCY OR INFLUENCE
 THE USE OF POWER AND EFFICACIOUS WORDS TO COMPEL ANOTHER TO COMMIT THE CRIME
 THE ACQUITTAL OF A CO – DEFENDANT IN A CONSPIRACY NEGATES THE EXISTENCE OF
SAID CONSPIRACY
 A PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT CANNOT BE HELD LIABLE ABSENT ANY PROOF THAT THE
PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION ACTUALLY COMMITTED THE CRIME. HOWEVER, THE
ACQUITTAL OF A PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION DUE TO LACK OF CRIMINAL
INTENT OR MALICE DOES NOT EXCUSE THE PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT
 PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE
COOPERATION
 THOSE WHO COOPERATE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE BY ANOTHER ACT
WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED
 REQUISITES:
 PARTICIPATION IN THE CRIMINAL RESOLUTION
 COOPERATION THROUGH ANOTHER ACT