CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances

JUSTIFYING CIRRCUMSTANCES
Imputability  an act may be ascribed to a person o as its author  act was freely and consciously done so it is put down to the doer as his own act Responsibility  obligation of taking the penal and civil consequences of the crime Guilt  element of responsibility Justifying Circumstances  act of person is said to be lawful so there is no crime, no criminal person and so no civil and criminal liability Exception: No civil liability except where civil liability is borne by the person benefited by the act Examples of Justifying Circumstances 1. Any person who acts in self-defences, provided that the ff. Circumstances concur: a. Unlawful aggression b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it. c. Lack of provocation on the part of the person defending himself 2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters or his relatives by affinity in the same degree and consanguinity w/in 4th civil degree provided that there is: a. Unlawful aggression b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it. c. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making the defense had no part therein 3. Anyone who acts in the defense of the person or rights of a stranger provided that there is: a. Unlawful aggression

b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it. c. Person defending be not induce by revenge, resentment or other motive 4. A person who in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act that causes damage to another provided that the ff. Are present: a. Evil sought to be avoided actually exists b. Injury feared is greater than what is done c. There s no other practical and less harmful ways to prevent it 5. A person who acts to fulfil a duty or lawful exercise of a right or office 6. A person who acts in obedience of an order issued by a superior for a lawful purpose

Burden of proof  Rests upon the accused Rights included in self- defense: 1. Life 2. Property 3. Honor Reasons why self-defense is lawful 1. For self-preservation of each person 2. Since it is impossible for the State to avoid unjust aggression always, then it gives to a person who is unlawfully attacked to protect himself from the impending peril in his life. 3. Self-defense is an act of social justice done to repel the attack of an aggression.

CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances

I. SELF-DEFENSE
Requisites of Self-Defense
A. Unlawful aggression
 It is necessary that we be attacked, or at least threatened with an attack in an immediate and imminent manner. Ex. Brandishing a knife with which to stab us Pointing a gun to discharge against us 2 kinds of aggression: y Lawful- when aggression is in the performance of a duty and the exercise of a right in a more or less violent manner y Unlawful- present when the peril to one s life, limb or right is either actual or imminent.  There must be an actual physical assault or at least a threat to inflict real injury  Not present in oral threats or a merely threatening stance or posture Note: Paramour surprised in the act of adultery cannot invoke self-defense if he killed the husband who was assaulting him Peril to one s Life 1. Actual danger must be present and is actually in existence  An actual physical assault places us in actual danger 2. Imminent- danger is in the point of happening  It is not required that attack already begins for it may be too late  An actual physical assault places us in actual danger Peril to one s Limb Ex. Attack with fist blows may imperil

one s safety from physical injuries Points to Remember 1. Actual force or use of actual weapon constitutes an unlawful aggression Excludes: insulting words w/out physical assault; light push But Includes: slap on face- because the face Represents a person s dignity, rights and safety 2. Mere belief of an impending attack is not sufficient; neither is an intimidating or threatening attitude 3. Foot-kick greeting is not unlawful aggression 4. If there is no imminent and real danger to a person s life or limb, there is no unlawful aggression 5. A strong retaliation for an injury or threat may amount to unlawful aggression. 6. Retaliation is not self defense- because in retaliation, aggression begun by the injured party already ceased while in self defense, aggression is still existing 7. To invoke self-defense, attack must be simultaneous w/out appreciable interval of time 8. Unlawful aggression must come from the person who was attacked by the accused 9. A public officer exceeding his authority may become an unlawful aggressor. Ex. When sheriff assigned to execute an order to seized a debtor s property and he chooses to get that which has sentimental value when other properties of the same value could be seized is an unlawful aggressor 10. Nature, location, and extent o f the wound allegedly inflicted by the injured party may disprove claim of self- defense. 11. Improbability of the deceased being the aggressor belies the claim of self-defense 2

CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances 12. The fact that the accused declined to give a statement when he surrendered to a policeman is inconsistent with the plea of self- defense 13. Physical fact on how the victim was killed determine whether or not the accused acted in self-defense 14. When the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression no longer exists 15. Retreat to take a more advantageous position is considered a continuation of unlawful aggression. 16. There is no unlawful aggression when there is agreement to fight. But where the deceased challenges person B for a fight and forthwith came to him to stab him with a knife,the accused not having accepted the challenge, acted in self-defense. 17. Aggression which is ahead of the stipulated time and place is unlawful 18. One who voluntarily joined a fight cannot claim self-defense 19. Rule is: Stand ground when in the right- the law does not require a person to retreat if the attacker is rapidly advancing upon him with a weapon 20. The belief of the accused may be considered in determining the existence of unlawful aggression. Ex. A saw B approaching with a pistol and uses violent menaces against his life. A thus, with a club in his hand strikes B over the head before or at the instant the pistol is discharged only to find out that the pistol was loaded instead with a powder and it was not true, here self-defense is justified. 21. There is self-defense even if the aggressor used a toy pistol, provided that the accused believed it was a real gun. 22. Mere threatening or intimidating attitude, not preceded by an outward or material aggression is not lawful aggression. pretext 23. Mere threatening attitude is not unlawful aggression. 24. In order to consider that unlawful aggression was actually committed, it is necessary that an attack or material aggression, an offensive act positively determining the intent of the aggressor to cause an injury shall have been made. Examples of threats to inflict an injury: y Aiming of revolver at another with intent to shoot him y Retreating 2 steps and placing a hand w/ a motion indicative of one s purpose to commit an assault w/ a weapon 25. Opening a knife and making a motion as if to make an attack 26. When intent to attack is manifest, picking up a weapon is sufficient unlawful aggression. 27. Aggression must be real, not imaginary 28. Aggression that is expected is still real, provided that it is imminent. Unlawful aggression in defense of other rights  Requires the 1st and 2nd requisites w/c are: 1. Unlawful aggression 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it 1. Defense of right to chastity- invoked if there is attempt to rape a woman 2. Defense of property- can be invoked only when it is coupled with an attack on the person entrusted with said property. 3. Defense of home- invoked if there is violent entry to another s house at night time by a person who is armed with a bolo and forcing his way into the house

CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances

Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it

 means that: 1. the person making the defense must do a necessary action-depends on the existence of unlawful aggression so that if there is no unlawful aggression or it has ceased, a course of action need not be taken 2. Person must use a means of defensedepends upon the nature and quality of the weapon used by the aggressor, his physical condition, size and other circumstances and those of the person defending himself and occasion of the assault Note: the law protects not only the person who repels an aggression (meaning actualreal; tangible) but even the person who tries to prevent an aggression (meaning imminent-about to happen) Circumstances to consider in determining the existence of unlawful aggression (that induced a person to take a course of action) 1. Place and occasion of the assault considered 2. The darkness of the night and the surprise w/c characterized the assault considered. Points to Remember 1. When the danger has ceased or has disappeared, no course of action is necessary 2. If a person has expressed his refusal to fight any longer, action of defense must stopped 3. The person defending himself is not expected to control his blow. 4. In repelling or preventing an unlawful aggression, the one defending must aim at his assailant, and not indiscriminately fire his deadly weapon. 5. Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel unlawful aggression to

be liberally construed in favour of lawabiding citizens. 6. While the law on self-defense allows a private individual to prevent or repel an aggression, the duty of a peace officer requires him to overcome his opponent.  The above preceding requisites are common in the 3 legitimate defenses 3 Legitimate Defenses 1. Self-defense 2. Defense of a relative 3. Defense of a stranger

B. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part

of the person defending himself

- present in the ff. circumstances:

1. When the person defending himself gave no provocation at all to the aggressor. 2. When even there was provocation, it was not sufficient-Note here that the exercise of a right cannot give rise to sufficient provocation 3. When, even if the provocation was sufficient, it was not given by the person himself 4. When even if the provocation was given by the person defending himself, it was not proximate and immediate to the act of aggression.

 Note: To determine the sufficiency of

provocation, one has to see if the provocation is sufficient to the act of aggression and is adequate to stir the aggressor to kits commission. Example: 1. When one challenges another to come out of a house for a fist fight. 2. When one imputes(accuses) another with vulgar words provoking the other to manifests and act of aggression. 4

CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances  If the accused appears to be the aggressor, it cannot be said that he was defending himself from the effect of another s agression making the defense and may not necessarily exist as a matter of fact 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it. 3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making the defense had no part in such provocation  Even if the relative defended gave the provocation, it is immaterial if the accused did not take part in the provocation  Even if the person defending his relative was also induced by revenge or hatred, for as long as the 3 requisites of defense of relatives are present, it will still be a legitimate defense

II. DEFENSE of RELATIVES

Relatives that can be defended: 1. Spouse 2. Ascendants 3. Descendants 4. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters (or) 5. relatives by affinity in the same degreeparents-in-law-, son or daughter-in-law and brother or sister-in-law  Death of spouse terminates the relationship by affinity, unless the marriage has resulted in an issue who is still living. 6. Relatives by consanguinity w/in 4th civil degree Basis of justification 1. Humanitarian sentiment 2. Impulse of blood- impels men to rush, on the occasion of great perils, to the rescue of those close to them by ties of blood Requisites 1. Unlawful aggression- there is an attack that imperils one s life and limbs Note: y if the accused appears to be the aggressor, he cannot invoke selfdefense y when 2 persons are getting ready to strike each other, there can be no unlawful aggression and a relative who buts in and administers a deadly blow cannot invoke self defense aand is guilty of homicide y Unlawful aggression may depend upon the honest belief of the one

III. DEFENSE of STRANGER

Basis of justification y Persons who defend others are on the same plane as those who defend themselves. y Any person would not see idly his companion being killed by another w/out attempting to save his life Requisites 1. Unlawful aggression 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repeal it. 3. Person defending be not induce by revenge, resentment or other motive  defense of a stranger must be actuated by a disinterested or generous motive  lacking if the person was prompted by his grudge with the assailant Who are deemed strangers?  Any person not mentioned in the enumeration of relatives Note: Furnishing a weapon to one in serious danger of being throttled is defense of stranger 5

CRIMINAL LAW-Justifying Circumstances

IV. AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL OR INJURY

Damage to another  covers injury to persons and damage to another property Requisites 1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exist  Evil must exist, not merely expected or anticipated or may happen in the future 2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it  Ex. Saving your life in a car accident over the life of a passer-by 3. There s no other practical and less harmful ways to prevent it Note: The greater evil should not be brought about by the negligence or imprudence of the actor  Ex. Person must drive with utmost care and not through reckless imprudence Damage to property: can be done to save an entity which is of higher value

 So he may use force if necessary to repel or prevent an unlawful invasion or usurpation of his property  Ex. Person assigned to execute lethal injection cannot be held liable for murder because he performs the act according to lawful exercise of office Note: y The actual invasion of property may consists of a mere disturbance of possession or of real dispossession

VI. OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE

Requisites 1. Than an order has been issued by a superior 2. That such order must be for some lawful purpose 3. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is lawful Ex. Executioner put a person to death prior to the date of his execution Points to Remember y When the order is not for a lawful purpose, the subordinate who obeyed it is criminally liable. y The subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior, if he is not aware of the illegality of the order and he is not negligent  meaning he acted in good faith, not aware of the illegality of the act and he was not negligent

V. FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT OR OFFIICE

Requisites 1. Accused acted in performance of a duty or in lawful exercise of a right or office 2. The injury caused or the offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of a duty or in lawful exercise of a right or office Note: y Shooting an offender who refused to surrender is justified y But shooting a thief who refused to bee arrested is not justified Lawful exercise of right or office  Owner of a thing has the right to exclude others from the enjoyment and disposal thereof