Basic information and examples of the crimes that applies in alternative circumstance

1. (ARTICLE 15 OF THE RPC)
BY: CHELDY SYGACO ELUMBA-PABLEO,MPA,LLB
CRIMINAL LAW

2. Are those which must be taken into consideration as
aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and
effects of the crime and other conditions attending its
commission. (these are considered for purpose of
imposing civil liability such as moral damages)
They are considered only when they influenced the
commission of the crime.

3. 1. Relationship
2. Intoxication
3. degree of instruction and education

4.  It is considered when the offended Spouse, Ascendants,
Descendants, legitimate, natural, or adopted Brother or
Sister or relative by Affinity (SADBroSA) of the offender.
 Stepparents and stepchildren are included by analogy but
not stepbrothers/stepsisters because the law specified only
legitimate, natural or adopted.
 It is mitigating in the crime against property by analogy to
Art. 332 which exempts the offender for theft, estafa, and
malicious mischief. (TEM)

5. In serious physical injuries committed against
a child due to the parents’ excessive
chastisement, relationship is not aggravating.
(Art. 263)
In crimes against chastity such as acts of
lasciviousness, relationship is aggravating.

6. Neither aggravating or mitigating if the relationship
is an element of the crime such as in parricide and
qualified rape. If what was charged was murder or
homicide instead of parricide, relationship becomes
generic only because the accused cannot be
convicted of what was not charged against him.

7.  Should affect the offender’s mental faculties.
 Mere drinking of liquor prior to the commission of the crime does
not necessarily produce a state of intoxication.
 A person pleading intoxication as a mitigating circumstance must
show that:
1. He has taken a quantity of alcoholic beverages prior of the
commission of the crime sufficient to produce the effect eof
obfuscating reason.
2. He is not a habitual drinker and did not take alcoholic drink with the
intention to reinforce his resolve to commit the crime (PP vs Pinca)

8. Would be considered as aggravating or
mitigating depends upon the gravity of
the crime committed.
EXAMPLE:
1. Parricide is as much reprehensible to
the educated as to the illiterate.

9. It is not literacy alone but intelligence or
breeding/instruction that is considered.
Even if one is has not been to school but comes
from the family of professionals, he must have had
some degree of instructions hence, he could easily
realize the significance of his act. His lack of
schooling then would not be mitigating.

10.  The high degree of learning should be taken in relation to the
crime committed whether his education and training puts him in a
better position to commit the crime.
 High education could be aggravating but is never mitigating
 Low education could be mitigating but will never be aggravating
 The fact that the person is professional, cannot mitigate a crime he
commits.
 Conversely, a person who has not gone to school cannot
aggravate his crime.

11. The degree of instruction or education may
already have been considered in the penalty
prescribed such as in abortion practiced by
the physician, in which case it should not be
considered anymore.