Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
QAC circumstances that change the nature of the crime. If 2 or more QAC, 1
would only qualify the offense and the other QAC would become GAC. Cannot be
offset by a Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance.
4.) A punched B, B fell down and hit his head on the ground which caused his death.
A contested that it was not his intention to kill B, A further argued that the death
of B was an accident and that he should not be held liable. Is A liable or not?
A is liable for the death of B. However A can apply for the Mitigating
Circumstance # 3 (No intention to commit so grave a wrong). Although A has no
intention to kill but to only cause physical injuries, the death of B cannot be
considered an accident therefor A cannot use accident as an Exempting
circumstance.
5.) Cruelty and Ignominy to be accepted against accused.
For cruelty to be accepted against accused, it must be shown that the accused
enjoyed and delighted in making his victim suffer
2 requisites are needed:
a.) The injury caused deliberately increased by causing other wrong and,
b.) That the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the
offender.
For ignominy to be accepted against the accused, must show that effects of the
crime will be MORE HUMILIATING, or to put the OFFENDED PARTY TO SHAME thus
adding to the victims moral suffering
6.)Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance vs Privilege Mitigating Circumstance
OMC The attendance of a ordinary mitigating circumstance, unless offset by an
aggravating circumstance, will lower the imposable penalty only to its minimum.
It should be borne in mind that the presence of 2 or more generic mitigating
circumstances, provided there is no aggravating circumstance, will lower the
imposable penalty by one degree, pursuant to Rule 5 of Art. 64 of the RPC.
PMC cannot be offset by any aggravating circumstance. Effect of imposing
upon the offender the penalty lower by one or two degrees than that provided by
law for the crime. Applies to both divisible and indivisible penalties.
7.) Excon escaped, when ordered to stop by the police he ran away, suddenly
emerged with a rock and assaulted the police. Five cautionary shots fired, no go,
when decided that Excon would escape, aimed and killed Excon. Is the police
officer liable?
Police officer is not liable for the death of Excon. The police officer was
performing his duty as a safety office of the public and additionally he already
fired 5 warning shots. Police office can invoke the justifying circumstance which
is fulfillment of duty therefore there is no criminal liability.
8.) Acts to consider treachery
Two conditions for the act to be considered done with treachery if (1) the
employment means of execution that gave the person attacked no opportunity
to defend himself, or retaliate or escape; and (2) the offender consciously
adopted the particular means, method or form of attack employed by him.
9.) DOLO vs CULPA
Dolo is deceit and Culpa is negligence. In DOLO, the act or omission is done with
FREEDOM, INTELIGENCE and INTENT. In Culpa, the act or omission is done with
FREEDOM, INTELIGENCE but without intent, instead of intent is there was
IMPRUDENCE, NEGLIGENCE, or LACK OF FORESIGHT or LACK OF SKILL.
10.)