CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY

I. Classification: In general the circumstances are either (i) defenses or (ii) modifying
circumstances

II. Defenses: those which if proven may result to an acquittal of the offender from the crime
charged or lead to non-criminal liability. They are the reasons advanced by the accused why he
may not be held criminally liable.

They are classified into the following:

A. As to form:

1. Positive or Affirmative- They are often called defenses in the nature of “Admission and
Avoidance”. The accused admits authorship of the act or omission charged and imputed to him
but he puts up matters to avoid criminally liability or which will result to his acquittal.
All the Justifying, Exempting and Absolutory Causes are Affirmative defenses.

2. Negative- the accused denies authorship or having performed the act or omission imputed to
him. Examples are denial, alibi, mistaken identity.

B. As to Effect:

1. Total or Perfect- those the effect of which will totally exonerate the accused. Example: a
complete justifying circumstance, amnesty
2. Partial- those which are intended to lessen the liability of the accused. They include proof
the offense is a lesser offenses, or that it is of a lower stage of execution, that the accused has
a lower participation and is not the principal .

C. As to source:

1. Legal- those provided for by statutes or by the constitution. For example: prescription of
crimes, marriage of the offender and offended; pardon, double jeopardy, amnesty.
2. Factual- those based on the circumstances of the commission of the crime relating to the
time, place, manner of commission; identification of the accused; reasons for the commission.
For example: alibi, self defense; insanity, mistaken identity.

III. Modifying Circumstances- those which will either increase or decrease the penalty. They are
called mitigating or aggravating circumstances

IV. Circumstances Recognized in the Philippines.

They are found either in the Revised Penal Code, Special Laws or in jurisprudence. The defenses
and modifying circumstances governed by the RPC include the following:

A. Justifying Circumstances- These are the defenses in which the accused is deemed to have
acted in accordance with the law and therefore the act is lawful. Since the act is lawful, it follows
that there is no criminal, no criminal liability and no civil liability, save in paragraph 4.

1. There is no mens rea or criminal intent

2. The circumstances pertain to the act and not to the actor. Hence all who participated in the
act will be benefited. Thus if the principal is acquitted there will be no accomplices and
accessories.
3. These apply only to intentional felonies, not to acts by omissions or to culpable felonies or to
violations of special laws
4. They are limited to the 6 enumerated in Article 11.

B. Exempting Circumstances- These are defenses where the accused committed a crime but
is not criminally liable. There is a crime, and there is civil liability but no criminal.

1. The basis is the lack of any of the elements which makes the act/omission voluntary, i.e.
freedom, intelligence, intent or due care.
2. These defenses pertain to the actor and not the act. They are personal to the accused in
whom they are present and the effects do not extend to the other participants. Thus if a principal
is acquitted, the other principals, accessories and accomplices are still liable.
3. They apply to both intentional and culpable felonies and they may be available in violations
of special laws.
4. They are limited to the 7 enumerated in Article 12.
 C. Absolutory Causes- These are defenses which have the same effects as the exempting
circumstances but they are not among those enumerated in Article 12. They are found in certain
Articles of the Revised Penal Code or are developed by jurisprudence.

1. They are based on public policy

2. Examples of those in the RPC include: non-liability for an attempted felony due to voluntary
desistance; Death/Physical Injuries Under Exceptional Circumstances
3. Those recognized and developed by jurisprudence include: mistake of fact, set-up/frame up,
instigation

D. Mitigating Circumstances- Those which when present results either to: (i) the penalty being
reduced by at least one degree or (ii) the penalty shall be imposed in its minimum period. They
are those enumerated in Article 13.

E. Extenuating Circumstances- .Those which have the same effect as mitigating

circumstances but are not among those enumerated in Article 13 but are provided for in certain
articles of the RPC and apply only to certain felonies. They are called “Special Mitigating
Circumstances”.

1. Examples: Abandonment in case of adultery; Release of the victim within 3 days with the
purpose not attained, in the felony of Slight Illegal Detention

F. Aggravating Circumstances- Those which when present will result either to: (i) a change
in the nature of the offense as to make it more serious and result to the imposition of a
higher penalty (ii) the penalty being imposed in its maximum period. They are provide for by
the Revised Penal Code as well as by special laws.

G. Alternative Circumstances- those which may either be appreciated as mitigating or

aggravating. They are enumerated in Article 15 of the RPC.

IV. Basic Rules on Affirmative Defenses

A. Justifying Circumstances, Exempting Circumstances, and Absolutory Causes, are

recognized as Affirmative Defenses
B. Since the accused has admitted authorship of the act or omission, it’s not anymore
necessary for the prosecution to prove his participation in the commission of the crime or his
identity, hence there may be a revere order of trial in that it will be the accused who will be the
first to present his evidence
C. It is incumbent upon the accused to prove his defense by” clear, positive and convincing
evidence” and his conviction is not that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt but that he was
unable to prove his defense.

CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES AS TO GRAVITY

I. The basis is the penalty prescribed by the RPC and not the actual penalty imposed by the court.
If both imprisonment and fine are prescribed as penalties, it is the penalty of imprisonment which
is used as basis.

II. The classifications are:

A. Light- the penalty is imprisonment of one day to thirty days or fine of not more than P200.00
1. They are punished only in their consumated stages except with respect to light felonies
against persons or property. The reason is because they produced such light or insignificant
results that society is satisfied if they are punished even if only in their consummated stage.
2. Only principals and accessories are liable

B Less Grave: by imprisonment of more than one month but not more than 6 years or fine of
P200.00 but not more than P6,000.00

C. Grave: the imprisonment is more than 6 years or fine of more than P6,000.00. They are either
1. Heinous- the penalty is reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua or 2. Non heinous.

II. The Importance of the classification is in relation to (a) prescription of crimes (b) complexing of
crimes (c) imposition of subsidiary penalty (d) determination of who are liable for the offense (e)
determination what stage of execution is punishable and (f) determination of the period of detention
of persons lawfully arrested without warrant.
ARTICLE 6. STAGES IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME (RPC)
I. Introduction: Generation of a Crime

A. The first is the Mental Stage

General Rule: Mental acts such as thoughts, ideas, opinions and beliefs, are not subject of penal
legislations. One may express an idea which is contrary to law, morals or is unconventional, but
as long as he does not act on them or induce others to act on them, such mental matters are
outside the realm of penal law and the person may not be subjected to criminal prosecution.

B. The Second: The External Stage which is where the accused performs acts which are
observable

1). The Preparatory acts: Acts which may or may not lead to the commission of a concrete
crime. Being equivocal they are not as rule punishable except when there is an express
provision of law punishing specific preparatory acts.

Example: (i) the general rule: buying of a gun, bolo or poison, even if the purpose is to use these
to kill a person; so also with conspiracies and proposals. (ii) the exception: possession of
picklocks and false keys is punished; as with conspiracies to commit treason, rebellion, sedition
and coup d’etat

2) The Acts of execution: the attempted, frustrated and consumated stages

II. Application of Article 6:

Only to intentional felonies by positive acts but not to: (i). Felonies by omission (ii) Culpable felonies
and (iii) Violations of special laws, unless the special law provides for an attempted or frustrated
stage. Examples of the exception are The Dangerous Drugs Law which penalizes an attempt to
violate some of its provisions, and The Human Security Act of 2007

III. The attempted stage:

"the accused commences the commission of a felonious act directly by overt acts but does not
perform all the acts of execution due to some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance”

A).(1). The attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a connection to a
particular, concrete offense, that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt
acts of the perpetrator, leading directly to the its realization and commission (2) The act must
not be equivocal but indicates a clear intention to commit a particular and specific felony. Thus
the act of a notorious criminal in following a woman can not be the attempted stage of any
felony.

B). Overt or external act is some physical deed or activity, indicating the intention to commit a
particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to is complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by
the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense

C). Examples:

1. The accused pressed a chemically -soaked cloth on the mouth of the woman to induce
her to sleep, while he lay on top of her and pressed his body to her. The act is not the overt
act that will logically and necessarily ripen into rape. They constitute unjust vexation. ( Note:
it would be attempted rape if he tried to undress the victim or touch her private parts) (
Balleros vs. People, Feb, 22, 2006)
2. One found inside a house but no article was found on him, is liable for trespass and not
for attempted theft or robbery even if he is a notorious robber
3. One found removing the glass window panes or making a hole in the wall is not liable for
attempted robbery but for attempted trespass

D) The accused has not yet passed the subjective phase or that phase encompassed from the
time an act is executed which begins the commission of the crime until the time of the
performance of the last act necessary to produce the crime, but where the accused has still
control over his actions and their results.
.
E).The accused was not able to continue performing the acts to produce the crime. He was
prevented by external forces and not because he himself chose not to continue. Such as when
his weap0n was snatched, or his intended victim managed to escape, or he was overpowered
or arrested.
 F). If the accused voluntarily desisted i.e he himself decided not to continue with his criminal
purpose, then he is not liable.
1. Reason: This is an absolutory cause by way of reward to those who, having set one foot
on the verge of crimes, heed the call of their conscience and return to the path of
righteousness. .
2. The reason for the desistance is immaterial
3. Exceptions: when the accused is liable despite his desistance
a). when the act performed prior to the desistance already constituted the attempted
stage of the intended felony. For example: the accused, with intent to kill, shot at the
victim but missed after which he “desisted”, his acts already constituted attempted
homicide
b). When the acts performed already gave rise to the intended felony. The decision not
to continue is not a legal but factual desistance. As in the case of a thief who returned
what he stole.
c). When the acts performed constitute a separate offense. Pointing a gun at another and
threatening to kill, and then desisting gives rise to grave threats.

IV. The Frustrated Stage:

the accused has performed all the acts of execution necessary to produce the felony but the crime
is not produced by reason of causes independent of the will of the accused.

A. The accused has passed the subjective phase and is now in the objective phase, or that
portion in the commission of the crime where the accused has performed the last act necessary
to produce the intended crime and where he has no more control over the results of his acts.

B. The non-production of the crime should not be due to the acts of the accused himself, for if it
were he would be liable not for the frustrated stage of the intended crime, but possibly for
another offense.

Thus: where the accused shot the victim mortally wounding him, but he himself saved the life of
his victim, his liability is that for serious physical injuries as the intent to kill is absent.

C. Attempted vs. Frustrated Homicide/murder. Where the accused, with intent to kill, injured
the victim but the latter did not die, when is the crime attempted or frustrated?

1. First View: “The subjective phase doctrine”. If at that point where the accused has still
control over the results of his actions but is stopped by reason outside of his own desistance
and the subjective phase has not been passed, the offense is attempted
2. Second View: The Mortal Wound or Life Threatening Injury Doctrine: If a mortal wound
or life threatening injury had been inflicted, the offense is frustrated, else it is attempted (
Palaganas vs. PP., Sept. 12, 2006)
3. Third View: The belief of the accused should be considered in that if the accused believed
he has done all which is necessary to produce death, then it is frustrated.

V. Consummated.
When all the elements of the crime are present whether it be the intended crime or a different crime

VI. Factors to Consider in determining the proper stage.

A. The manner of the commission of the crime and how it is defined by the RPC. Some crimes
have only the consumated stage (Formal crimes) such as threats, coercion, alarms and scandal,
slander, acts of lasciviousness. In rape the gravamen is whether there is penetration or not, no
matter how slight, hence rape is either attempted or consummated.

B. The elements of the felony.

1. Theft: it is consummated once the article is in the material physical possession of the
accused, whether actual or constructive. His ability to dispose off the thing his immaterial
and does not constitute an element.

N.B. Decisions of the CA as to bulky items where the accused must have the opportunity
dispose off or appropriate the articles have already been reversed. The doctrine now is that
theft has no frustrated stage ( Valenzuela vs. PP. June 21, 2007)

2. Estafa: It is not the material possession but the existence of damage which consumates
the crime.
 3. Robbery with Force Upon Things: The thing must be brought out of the building to
consumate the crime.

C. The Nature of the Felony Itself

1. Crimes which require the participation of two persons have no frustrated stage. Examples:
Adultery and concubinage; corruption of a public official.
2. There are crimes which are punished according to their results and not the intention of the
accused such as physical injuries.
3. As to Arson: it is consumated once a part of the building is burned. It has been ruled that
if the accused lit certain materials but no part of the building as burned, the crime is in its
frustrated stage and if there was no material which was as yet lit, then arson is still in its
attempted. Thus one who places sacks soaked in gasoline near the post and lit it but no part
of the building was burned, committed frustrated arson.

(Personal Opinion: there can be no frustrated stage, but only attempted stage if the fire was
not yet applied to the building. But if fire was applied to the building or a part thereof but no
part of the building was burned, then it is attempted. The only consideration is whether or
not the accused succeeded in burning a part of the building. If no part of the building was
burned, it is still attempted arson no matter how far gone were the acts of the accused
The Principle of Legality
A. The principle which declares that for any human conduct to be considered as a criminal act,
there must be a specific statute or law declaring such conduct as a crime and providing for a
penalty.

B. Any human conduct, no matter how evil or reprehensible it may be, can not subject the actor
to punishment if there is no law punishing the act.

C. This is expressed in the maxim “Nullum crimen noella pena sine legi”.

D. This principle is the opposite of “Common Law Crimes”.

1. Common Law Crimes are often called “Court Declared/Created Crimes”