AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES circumstances which qualify the killing of person to

murder.
Aggravating circumstances are those which, if attendant in the
commission of the crime, serve to increase the penalty without,
however, exceeding the maximum of the penalty provided by
law for the offense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Inherent — Those that must of necessity accompany the
commission of the crime. (Art. 62, par. 2)
Example — Evident premeditation is inherent in
robbery, theft, estafa, adultery and concubinage.

BASIS – They are based on the greater perversity of the

offender manifested in the commission of the felony as shown DISTINCTION BETWEEN QUALIFYING AND GENERIC
by: AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
(1) the motivating power itself, Qualifying Generic
(2) the place of commission,
Cannot be offset by a May be compensated by a
(3) the means and ways employed,
mitigating circumstance mitigating circumstance
(4) the time, or
To give the crime its proper [If not offset by any
(5) the personal circumstances of the offender, or of the
and exclusive name [and] to mitigating circumstance] to
offended party
place the author thereof in increase the penalty which
FOUR KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES such a situation as to should be imposed upon the
deserve no other penalty accused to the maximum
1. Generic — Those that can generally apply to all crimes. than that specially prescribed period, but without exceeding
Example — Dwelling, nighttime, or recidivism. In by law for said crime. the limit prescribed by law
Art. 14, the circumstances in paragraphs Nos. 1, 2, 3 Must be alleged in the May not be alleged by the
(dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 1 0 , 1 4 , 1 8 , 1 9 , and 20, information information
except "by means of motor vehicles," are generic
aggravating circumstances. Aggravating Circumstances not alleged, but must be proved

2. Specific — Those that apply only to particular crimes.
Example — Ignominy in crimes against chastity
or cruelty and treachery in crimes against persons. In
Art. 14, the circumstances in paragraphs Nos. 3 (except
dwelling), 15,16,17 and 21 are specific aggravating
circumstances.
3. Qualifying — Those that change the nature of the crime.
Example — Alevosia (treachery) or evident
premeditation qualifies the killing of a person to murder.
Art. 248 enumerates the qualifying aggravating
 An aggravating circumstance, even if not alleged in the
information, may be proved over the objection of the
defense. An aggravating circumstance should be proved
as fully as the crime itself in order to increase the
penalty.
 Such evidence merely forms part of the proof of the
actual commission of the offense and does not violate
the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of
the nature and cause of accusation against him.
 This rule may be given retroactive effect in the light of
the well-established rule that statutes regulating the

CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES) 1

 procedure of the courts will be construed as applicable
to actions pending and undetermined at the time of their
passage.
If not alleged, they may still be considered in the award of
damages.
EXCEPTION: As regards a qualifying aggravating circumstance,
the same must be alleged in the information because it is an
integral part of the offense.
Aggravating Circumstances which do not Have the Effect
of Increasing The Penalty.
 Aggravating circumstances (a) which in themselves
constitute a crime specially punishable by law, or (b)
which are included by the law in denning a crime and
prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into
account for the purpose of increasing the penalty (Art.
62, par. 1)
Aggravating circumstances which are personal to the offenders
 Aggravating circumstances which arise: (a) from the
moral attributes of the offender, or (b) from his private
relations with the offended party, or (c) from any other
personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate the liability
of the principals, accomplices, and accessories as to
whom such circumstances are attendant. (Art. 62, par.
3)
Aggravating circumstances which depend for their application
upon the knowledge of the offenders.
 The circumstances which consist (1) in the material
execution of the act, or (2) in the means employed to
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate the liability of
those persons only who had knowledge of them at the
time of the execution of the act or their cooperation
therein. (Art. 62, par. 4)

 The same rule shall apply with respect to any

aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such
a degree that it must of necessity accompany the
commission thereof. (Art. 62, par. 2)
Example –
a) Evident premeditation is inherent in theft,
robbery, estafa, adultery and concubinage.
b) Taking advantage of public position is
inherent in crimes where the offenders, who
are public officers, committed the crime in the
exercise of their functions, such as in bribery,
malversation, etc.

CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES) 2

 PARAGRAPH 1
That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, shown by personal
circumstance of the offender and also by the means used to
secure the commission of the crime.
Meaning of "advantage be taken by the offender of his public
position."
 The public officer must use the influence, prestige or
ascendancy which his office gives him as the means by
which he realizes his purpose.
This circumstance applies only when (1) the person committing
a crime is a public officer (2) who takes advantage of his public
position.
There must be proof that the accused took advantage of his
public position.
Present when:
 A councillor collects fines and misappropriates them.
 Even if defendant did not abuse his office, if it is proven
that he has failed in his duties as such public officer, this
circumstance would warrant the aggravation of his
penalty.
Not Present when:
 A Congressman offered resistance to a peace officer.
 Where taking advantage of official-position is made by
law an integral element of the crime, such as in
malversation under Art. 217, or in falsification of
document committed by public officers under Art. 171.
 If accused could have perpetrated the crime without
occupying police position.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 2
That the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to
the public authorities.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – 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 person against whom the crime is
committed. (U.S. vs. Rodriguez, 19 Phil. 150,156;
People vs. Siojo, 61 Phil. 307, 317)
3. The offender knows him to be a public authority.
4. His presence has not prevented the offender from
committing the criminal act.
Meaning of "public authority."
 A public authority, sometimes also called a person in
authority, is a public officer who is directly vested with
jurisdiction, that is, a public officer who has the power to
govern and execute the laws.
 Governor
 Mayor
 Councilor
 Barangay Captain
 This circumstance is not applicable to “agents.” An 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, such as barrio councilman, barrio policeman
3
 and barangay leader, and any person who comes to the
aid of persons in authority."
 Chief of police
If the crime is committed against a public authority while he is
in the performance of his official duty, the offender commits
direct assault (Art. 148) without this aggravating
circumstance.
 This rule was not followed in the case of People vs.
Santok, G.R. No. L-18226, May 30, 1963, where it was
held that the crime committed was homicide with the
aggravating circumstance of the commission of the
offense in contempt of the public authority, since the
deceased was shot while in the performance of his
official duty as barrio lieutenant.
The accused should have been prosecuted for and
convicted of complex crime of homicide with direct
assault (Art. 249, in relation to Art. 48 and Art. 148,
Revised Penal Code), without the aggravating
circumstance.
Lack of knowledge on the part of the offender that a public
authority is present indicates lack of intention to insult the
public authority.
Presence of public authority has not prevented offender from
committing the crime.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 3
That the act be committed (1) with insult or in disregard of the
respect due the offended party on account of his (a) rank, (b)
age, or (c) sex, or (2) that it be committed in the dwelling of
the offended party, if the latter has not given provocation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the
personal circumstances of the offended party and the place of
the commission of the crime.
Applicable only to crimes against persons or honor
If all the four circumstances are present, they have the weight
of one aggravating circumstance only.
Meaning of Rank
 "Rank" refers to a high social position or standing
With insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended party
on account —
Of the rank of the offended party.
 Private citizen who attacked and injured a person in
authority
 Pupil who attacked and injured his teacher
 Killing a judge because he was strict or because of
resentment
 The killing of a staff sergeant by his corporal
 The killing of the Assistant Chief of Personnel Transaction
of the Civil
 Service Commission by a clerk therein;
 The murder by a pupil of his teacher; the murder of a
municipal mayor;
 The murder of a city chief of police by the chief of the
secret service division;
4
  Assault upon a 66-year-old CFI (now RTC) judge by a
justice of the peace (now municipal judge);
 The killing of a consul by a mere chancellor; and the
killing of an army general.
Of the age of the offended party
 Happens when there is an age gap between the offender
and the offended party.
 Not applicable to robbery with homicide, since the crime
is mostly a crime against property and not persons
Of the sex of the offended party.
 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 to:
 When the offender acted with passion and obfuscation
 When there exists a relationship between the two
parties
 When the condition of being a woman is indispensable
in the commission of the crime.
That the crime be committed in the dwelling of the
offended party
Meaning of dwelling
 Dwelling must be a building or structure, exclusively
used for rest and comfort. 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.”
 A combination house and store or a market
where the offended party sleeps is not considered
as dwelling
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
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.
The offended party must not give provocation. If he does, he
loses he loses his right to the respect and consideration due
him in his own house.
The provocation must be:
1. Given by the owner of the dwelling,
2. Sufficient, and
3. Immediate to the commission of the crime.
If all these conditions are present, the offended party is
deemed to have given provocation, and the fact that the crime
is committed in the dwelling of the offended party is not an
aggravating circumstance.
If not, then the act is considered and aggravating circumstance.
When dwelling applies (), and when dwelling doesn’t
apply ():
 Crime was committed inside the dwelling of the victim
 When the dwelling where the crime was
committed did not belong to the offended party,
this circumstance does not apply.
 When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient
and immediate provocation
 Crime was begun in the dwelling, even if the killing took
place outside
 When the victim was killed on his own dwelling, even if
the offender did not enter such premises
 Where the deceased was called down from his
house and he was murdered in the vicinity of the
house.
5
 When the crime is committed in the dependencies, the
foot of the staircase and enclosure under the house
 When the victim was stabbed at the foot of their
stairs (People vs. Diamonon)
 If the deceased was only about to step on the
first rung of the ladder when he was assaulted
(People vs. Sespene)
 Temporary dwelling (People vs. Badilla)
 Victims sleeping as guests in the house of another
person (People vs. Basa)
 When the crime is committed by the husband to his wife
in a house not their conjugal home (People vs. Galapia)
 When the offended party has two houses.
 When the victim was raped in the boarding house she
was renting as a bedspacer (People vs. Daniel)
 In abduction or illegal detention where the victim was
taken from her or his house and carried away to another
place
 In robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons because this class of robbery can be committed
without the necessity of trespassing the sanctity of the
offended party's house.
 When robbery is committed by the use of force
on things.
 Adultery
 But the rule is different if both the defendants
(the wife and her paramour) and the offended
party were living in the same house because the
defendants had a right to be in the house.
 When both offender and offended party are
occupants of the same house (U.S. vs.
Rodriguez) and this is true even if offender is a
servant in the house. (People vs. Caliso)
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 4
That the act be committed with (1) abuse of confidence, or (2)
obvious ungratefulness.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the
means and ways employed.
Abuse of Confidence
 This circumstance exists only when the offended party
has trusted the offender who later abuses such trust by
committing the crime. The abuse of confidence must be
a means of facilitating the commission of the crime, the
culprit taking advantage of the offended party's belief
that the former would not abuse said confidence.
 The confidence between the offender and the offended
party must be immediate and personal.
Requisites:
1. That the offended party had trusted the offender.
2. That the offender abused such trust by committing a
crime against the offended party.
3. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission
of the crime.
Ungratefulness must be obvious, i.e., manifest and clear.
 Accused who killed his father-in-law in whose house he
lived and who partially supported him. (People vs.
Floresca)
 A security guard killed a bank officer and robbed the
bank. (People vs. Nismal)
 When a visitor commits robbery or theft in the house of
his host
 The act of stealing the property of the host is
considered as committed with abuse of
confidence (Mariano vs. People)
6
 PARAGRAPH 5
That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief
Executive, or in his presence, or where public authorities are
engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place dedicated
to religious worship.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the
place of the commission of the crime, which must be respected.
Offender must have intention to commit a crime when he
entered the place.
Applicable to:
 Churches and other places of religious worship
 Cemeteries not included
 In the presence of the chief executive
 In an voting precinct during election day
Place where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of
their duties (par. 5), distinguished from contempt or insult to
public authorities, (par. 2)
1. In both, the public authorities are in the performance of
their duties.
2. Under par. 5, the public authorities who are in the
performance of their duties must be in their office; while
in par. 2, the public authorities are performing their
duties outside of their office.
3. Under par. 2, the public authority should not be the
offended party; while under par. 5, he may be the
offended party. (U.S. vs. Baluyot)
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 6
That the crime be committed (1) in the nighttime, or (2) in an
uninhabited place, or (3) by a band, whenever such
circumstance may facilitate the commission of the offense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – They are based on the time and place of the
commission of the crime and means and ways employed.
These circumstances, if present at a crime, are considered
separately when their elements are distinctly perceived and can
subsist independently, revealing a greater degree of perversity.
(People vs. Santos)
When aggravating:
1. When it facilitated the commission of the crime; or
2. When especially sought for by the offender to insure the
commission of the crime or for the purpose of impunity
(People vs. Pardo); or
3. When the offender took advantage thereof for the
purpose of impunity.
Nighttime – that period of darkness beginning at end of dusk
and ending at dawn. Nights are from sunset to sunrise.
Nighttime by and of itself is not an aggravating circumstance,
but it will be if (1) it is especially sought for; or, if not, (2) used
to facilitate the commission of the crime or if (3) taken
advantage of by the offender to commit the crime
When the place of the crime is illuminated by light, nighttime is
not aggravating. The lighting of a matchstick or use of
flashlights, however, does not negate the aggravating
circumstance of nighttime.
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.
7
Determined by whether or not in the place of the commission of
the offense there was a reasonable possibility of the victim
receiving some help.
By a band – more than three armed malefactors shall have
acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a band. The armed men
must act together in the commission of the crime. If one of the
four armed persons is a principal by inducement, they do not
form a band.
Aggravating in:
 Crimes against property or persons
 Robbery with homicide
Not aggravating in:
 Crimes against chastity
 Brigandage, because it is inherent
"Stone" is included in the term "arms."
PARAGRAPH 7
That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or
misfortune.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Time of the commission of the crime.
The phrase "or other calamity or misfortune" refers to other
conditions of distress similar to those precedingly enumerated,
that is, "conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic."
Applied to the chaotic condition resulting from the liberation of
San Pablo was considered a calamity (People vs. Penjan)
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 8
That the crime be committed with the aid of (1) armed men, or
(2) persons who insure or afford impunity.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – The means and ways of committing the crime.
Absorbed by – employment of a band
Requisites:
1. That armed men (or women) or persons took part in the
commission of the crime, directly or indirectly
EXCEPTIONS
 This aggravating circumstance shall not be
considered when both the attacking party and the
party attacked were equally armed. (Albert)
 This aggravating circumstance is not present
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.
2. That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied
upon them when the crime was committed.
"With the aid of armed men" (Par. 8), distinguished from "by a
band." (Par. 6)
 By a band requires that more than three armed
malefactors shall have acted together in the commission
of an offense. Aid of armed men is present even if one
of the offenders merely relied on their aid, for actual aid
is not necessary.
8
 PARAGRAPH 9
That the accused is a recidivist.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by his
inclination to crimes.
Who 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
the Revised Penal Code. (People vs. Lagarto)
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.
Meaning of "at the time of his trial for one crime."
 The phrase "at the time of his trial" should not be
restrictively construed as to mean the date of
arraignment. It is employed in its general sense,
including the rendering of the judgment. It is 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. (People vs. Lagarto)
When one 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.
 But recidivism was considered aggravating in a usury
case where the accused was previously convicted of the
same offense. Under its Art. 10, the Revised Penal Code
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
should be deemed as supplementing special laws of a
penal character. (People vs. Hodges)
No recidivism if the subsequent conviction is for an offense
committed before the offense involved in the prior conviction.
 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. (People vs.
Baldera)
There is recidivism 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; but amnesty extinguishes the penalty and its effects.
PARAGRAPH 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.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender as shown 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
3. That he is convicted of the new offense.
9
Reiteracion or habituality, 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
10avour of the accused by not taking this aggravating
circumstance into account.
The four forms of repetition are:
1. Recidivism. (Paragraph 9, Art. 14)
2. Reiteracion or habituality. (Paragraph 10, Art. 14)
3. Multi-recidivism or habitual delinquency. (Art. 62,
paragraph 5)
4. Quasi-recidivism. (Art. 160)
Recidivism and reiteracion, distinguished.
a) In reiteracion, it is necessary that the offender shall
have served out his sentence for the first offense;
whereas, in recidivism, it is enough that a final
judgment has been rendered in the first offense.
b) In reiteracion, the previous and subsequent offenses
must not be embraced in the same title of the Code;
whereas, recidivism, requires that the offenses be
included in the same title of the Code.
c) Reiteracion is not always an aggravating circumstance
whereas, recidivism is always to be taken into
consideration in fixing the penalty to be imposed upon
the accused.
Habitual delinquency.
 There is habitual delinquency when a person, within a
period of ten 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
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.
(Art. 62, last paragraph)
 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.
PARAGRAPH 11
That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward
or promise.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by the
motivating power itself.
This aggravating circumstance presupposes the concurrence of
two or more offenders.
 When this aggravating circumstance is present, there
must be two or more principals, the one who gives or
offers the price or promise and the one who accepts it,
both of whom are principals—to the former, because he
directly induces the latter to commit the crime, and the
latter because he commits it.
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.
When Par. 11 is qualifying:
 P procured an ignorant man to kill the brother and
grandniece of P for a reward of P60. The ignorant man,
following the instruction of P, killed them. Held: Murder
by inducement of a price is committed. (U.S. vs. Parro,
supra)
10
  If the price, reward or promise is alleged in the
information as a qualifying aggravating circumstance, it
shall be considered against all the accused, it being an
element of the crime of murder.
When Par. 11 is generic:
 In the case of People vs. Talledo and Timbreza, it was
held that the aggravating circumstance of price or
reward cannot be considered against the other accused
for the reason that it was not she who committed the
crime in consideration of said price or reward.
If without previous promise it was given voluntarily after the
crime had 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. (U.S. vs. Flores, 28 Phil. 29, 34)
PARAGRAPH 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.
Par. 12 distinguished from Par. 7.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means and ways employed
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.
1. By using fire – If the offender burns the offended
party’s house without intention to kill him, the crime is
Arson.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
If the offender intends to kill the victim by burning his
house, the crime is murder.
If the house is set on fire after killing the victim, there
are separate cases for arson and murder or homicide.
2. By using explosion – If a grenade is thrown at a house
and the offender had no intent to kill the persons living
inside, the crime is destruction, even if one of the
persons inside died as a consequence of the act.
But if there is intent to kill and explosion is used by the
offender to accomplish his criminal purpose, it is murder
if the victim dies as a direct consequence thereof
3. By means of derailment of locomotives – Under Art.
330, which defines and penalizes the crime of damage to
means of communication, derailment of cars, collision or
accident must result from damage to a railway,
telegraph or telephone lines.
As such, even if there is intent to kill and derailment of
locomotives or communication lines is used to achieve
such act, it cannot increase the penalty since the
aggravating circumstance is already defined by a
provision.
 Under par. 12, the crime is committed by means of any
of such acts involving great waste or ruin. Under par. 7,
the crime is committed on the occasion of a calamity or
misfortune.
11
 PARAGRAPH 13
That the act be committed with evident premeditation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – ways of committing the crime, because evident
premeditation implies a deliberate planning of the act before
executing it.
Essence of premeditation
 The essence of 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
calm judgment. (People vs. Durante)
 This circumstance applies when the offender has
sufficient time to reflect and allow his conscience to
overcome his resolution to kill, time which he invests on
planning to execute the crime (People vs. Ompad)
Not aggravating when:
 If the crime resulted from rising tempers, not a
deliberate plan (People vs. Padrones)
 When the attack was made in the heat of anger.
(People vs. Anin)
Requisites of evident premeditation:
The prosecution must prove —
1. The time when the offender determined to commit the
crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to
his determination; and
3. A 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.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
Illustration:
Manalinde illustrates the three requisites of evident
premeditation.
First requisite — On a certain date, Manalinde accepted the
proposition that he would turn huramentado and kill the first
two persons he would meet in the market place. On said date,
the offender is said to have determined to commit the crime.
Second requisite — He undertook the journey to comply
therewith and provided himself with a weapon. The journey and
the carrying of the weapon are acts manifestly indicating that
the offender clung to his determination to commit the crime.
Third requisite — After the journey for a day and a night, he
killed the victims. One day and one night constitute a sufficient
lapse of time for the offender to realize the consequences of his
contemplated act.
Reason for the difference in rulings
 It is not necessary for the offender to premeditate the
killing of a specific person. He can target a group of
people, a class, etc, which is also aggravating in those
circumstances.
Evident premeditation may be considered as to principal by
induction.
Evident premeditation, while inherent in robbery, may be
aggravating in robbery with homicide if the premeditation
included the killing of the victim.
12
 PARAGRAPH 14
That (1) craft, (2) fraud, or (3) disguise be employed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means employed in the commission of the crime.
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 the use of intellectual trickery or cunning on
the part of the accused. Involves act of pretending, etc.
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.
How is craft distinguished from fraud?
 When there is a direct inducement by insidious words or
machinations, fraud is present; otherwise, the act of the
accused done in order not to arouse the suspicion of the
victim constitutes craft.
Disguise – resorting to any device to conceal identity. Involves
wearing masks, handkerchiefs, uniforms of constabulary, using
an assumed name, etc. If the accused can be recognized,
Disguise cannot be used.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 15
That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or (2) means
be employed to weaken the defense.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Meaning of "advantage be taken."
 To take advantage of superior strength means to use
purposely excessive force out of proportion to the means
of defense available to the person attacked.
The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength
depends on the age, size and strength of the parties.
 A strong man has ill-treated a child, an old or decrepit
person, or one weakened by disease, or where a
person's physical strength has been overcome by the
use of drugs or intoxicants.
 An attack made by a man with a deadly weapon upon an
unarmed and defenseless woman
 When the offenders have numerical superiority
 When weapon used is out of proportion to the defense
available to the offended party
 Coercion and forcible abduction, when greatly in excess
of that required to commit the offense.
Not applicable:
 When the attack was made on the victim alternately,
there is no abuse of superior strength.
 Parricide against the wife
 Three persons armed with bolos attacked another who
was armed with a revolver, it was held that there was
no abuse of superior strength, as their strength was
almost balanced, a revolver being as effective, if not
more so, than three bolos.
 When one acted as principal and the other two as
accomplices.
13
Abuse of Superior Strength (Par. 15) distinguished from
Band (Par. 6)
 What is taken into account in the Abuse of Superior
Strength is not the number of aggressors nor the fact
that they are armed, but their relative physical might
vis-a-vis the offended party. (People vs. Apduhan, Jr.)
Means employed to weaken defense
This circumstance is applicable only to crimes against persons,
and sometimes against person and property, such as robbery
with physical injuries or homicide.
 Where one, struggling with another, suddenly throws a
cloak over the head of his opponent and while in this
situation he wounds or kills him. (U.S. vs. Devela,
supra)
 One who, while fighting with another, suddenly casts
sand or dirt upon the latter's eyes and then wounds or
kills him (People vs. Siaotong)
 Intoxicating the victim to weaken defense
o If the victim is intoxicated to the point that he
cannot defend himself completely, treachery may
be considered.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 16
That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means and ways employed in the commission of the
crime.
Meaning of treachery.
 There is treachery when the offender commits any of the
crimes 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 offended party might
make.
Treachery means that the offended party was not given
opportunity to make a defense.
Rules regarding treachery.
1. Applicable only to crimes against the person –
This is based on the phrase "crime against the
person" in the definition of treachery.
2. Means, methods or forms need not insure
accomplishment of crime –
It is not necessary that the means, methods or
forms employed in the execution of the crime
insure its accomplishment, as the law says, "to
insure its execution" only.
3. The mode of attack must be consciously adopted –
This is based on the phrase "employing means,
methods, or forms in the execution which tend
directly and specially," in the definition of
treachery.
14
 PARAGRAPH 17
That means be employed or circumstances brought about which
add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means employed
Ignominy – Ignominy is 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, less serious physical
injuries, light or grave coercion, and murder.
"That means be employed." – Augmenting the wrong done
by increasing the pain
"Which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act." –
According to this clause, the means employed or the
circumstances brought about must tend to make the effects of
the crime more humiliating or to put the offended party to
shame
It is required that the offense be committed in a manner that
tends to make its effects more humiliating to the victim, that is,
add to his moral suffering. (People vs. Carmina)
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 18
That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – means and ways employed to commit the crime.
Unlawful entry – There is an unlawful entry when an entrance
is effected by a way not intended for the purpose. Unlawful
entry must be a means to effect entrance and not for escape.
(People vs. Sunga)
Reason for aggravation
 One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men
to guard their property and provide for their personal
safety, shows a greater perversity, a greater audacity;
hence, the law punishes him with more severity.
Dwelling and unlawful entry taken separately in murders
committed in a dwelling.
 When the accused gained access to the dwelling by
climbing through the window and once inside, murdered
certain persons in the dwelling, there were two
aggravating circumstances which attended the
commission of the crimes — dwelling and unlawful
entry. (People vs. Barruga)
Unlawful entry is not aggravating in trespass to dwelling.
 Trespass to dwelling is committed when a private
individual shall enter the dwelling of another against the
latter's will and may be committed by means of
violence. (Art. 280)
15
 PARAGRAPH 19
That as a means to the commission of a crime, a wall, roof,
floor, door, or window be broken.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means and ways employed to commit the crime.
"As a means to the commission of a crime." – It is not
necessary that the offender should have entered the building.
What aggravates the liability of the offender is the breaking of a
part of the building as a means to the commission of the crime.
Where breaking of door or window is lawful.
 Rule 113, Sec. 11 (Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
— An officer, in order to make an arrest, either by virtue
of a warrant, or without a warrant as provided in Section
5, may break into any building or enclosure where the
person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be,
if he is refused admittance thereto, after announcing his
authority and purpose.
 Rule 126, Sec. 7 (Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
—The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
authority, may break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house or any part of a house or anything
therein to execute the warrant or liberate himself or any
person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained
therein.
CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES)
PARAGRAPH 20
That the crime he committed (1) with the aid of persons under
fifteen years of age, or (2) by means of motor vehicles,
airships, or other similar means.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
BASIS – Means and ways employed to commit the crime.
"With the aid of persons under fifteen years of age." –
Inducement of a person under fifteen years of age
“By means of motor vehicle” – Use of motor vehicle is
aggravating where the accused used the motor vehicle in going
to the place of the crime, in carrying away the effects thereof,
and in facilitating their escape.
Aggravating circumstances:
 Crime of forcible abduction
 Fetching and luring the victim
 Trailing the victim’s car
 Theft, when a truck was used in carrying away the
stolen rails and iron and wooden ties from the scene of
the theft to the place where they were sold (People vs.
Arabia)
Not aggravating circumstances:
 If the motor vehicle was used only in facilitating the
escape,
 If the use of the vehicle is incidental
 Estafa
 Theft
"Or other similar means." – The expression should be
understood as referring to motorized vehicles or other efficient
means of transportation similar to automobile or airplane.
16
 PARAGRAPH 21 No cruelty when:

That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be  Other wrong was done after victim was dead.
deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary  Where the assailant does acts not for the purpose of
for its commission. increasing his victim’s sufferings, but to to achieve said
felony (U.S. vs. Gasal)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ignominy distinguished from cruelty.
BASIS – Ways employed in committing the crime.
 Ignominy (par. 17) involves moral suffering, while
Cruelty – There is cruelty when the culprit enjoys and delights cruelty (par. 21) refers to physical suffering.
in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing him
unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal
act. (People vs. Dayug)

Cruelty refers to physical suffering of victim purposely intended

by offender.

Requisites of cruelty:

1. That the injury caused be deliberately increased by

causing other wrong;
2. That the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution
of the purpose of the offender.

"Be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong." –

This phrase means that the accused at the time of the
commission of the crime had a deliberate intention to prolong
the suffering of the victim.

For cruelty to be aggravating, it is essential that the wrong

done was intended to prolong the suffering of the victim,
causing him unnecessary moral and physical pain.

Cruelty considered:

 Cruelty considered in murder by burning mouth of child.

 Extracting victim's eye and stuffing his mouth with mud.
 Inflicting various successive wounds upon a person in
order to cause his death

CRIMINAL LAW I – REVISED PENAL CODE ART. 14 (AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES) 17