ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES

1. RELATIONSHIP

WHEN AGGRAVATING WHEN MITIGATING WHEN EXEMPTING HIGHER PENALTY NEITHER MITIGATING
OR AGGRAVATING
 Against persons in cases where the  Slight physical injuries In article 332 Article 246 Crime of When relationship is an
offended party is a relative of a or less serious No criminal only civil Parricide: element of the offense
higher party than the offender physical injury if the liability Father, mother, child because it is
 When the offender and offended offended party is a If committed by (legitimate/illegitimate), any inseparable from and
party of the same level, as killing a relative of a lower spouses, ascendants, of his ascendants and inherent in the offense.
brother degree of the descendants, descendants.
 Crime against a persons in any offender relatives by affinity Examples:
serious physical injuries (SPI) even if  In trespass to in the same line, Parricide
the offended party is a descendant. dwelling brothers and sisters Adultery
 SPI is committed by the offender  Crime against and brothers-in-law Concubinage
against his child property and sisters-in-law, if
(legitimate/illegitimate) or any of his 1. Robbery living together
legitimate other descendants. 2. Usurpation
 Slight physical injuries or less serious 3. Fraudulent Theft
physical injury if the offended party is Insolvency Swindling or estafa
a relative of a higher degree of the Malicious Mischief
offender
 Homicide, murder even if the victim
of the crime is a relative of lower
degree
 Crime against chastity
(lasciviousness, rape) – Why?
Because the nature and effect of the
crime committed.
 2. INTOXICATION

MITIGATING AGGRAVATING
 If not habitual, accidental, intentional (at the time of the  If habitual
commission of the criminal act, he has taken such quantity of  It is intentional (when the offender drinks liquor fully knowing its
alcoholic drinks as to blur his reason and deprive him of a certain effects, to find in liquor as stimulant to commit a crime or a means
degree of control) People vs Moral 132 SCRA 474 – there Is no to suffocate any remorse)
showing of excessive and habitual use of intoxicating drinks or that
the accused purposely drunk in order to commit the crime.
1. The accuses state of intoxication must be proved
2. The liquor taken must be of such quantity as to have
blurred his reason and deprived of self-control, if not; he is
not in a state of intoxication
 Not subsequent to the plan to commit felony

Reason: it finds its reason in the fact that when a person is under the Reason: because it is intentional, the reason is that the offender
influence of liquour, his exercise of will power is impaires resorted to it in order to bolster his courage to commit a crime.
 3. DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION OF THE OFFENDER

MITIGATING AGGRAVATING
 Low of instruction and education and lack of it High degree of instruction and education,
 Lack of instruction applies only to him who has not received any instructions when the offender avails himself of his
learning in the committing the crime.
NOT MITIGATING
 If he did not finish even the first grade in elementary school Example
 When the accused finished Grade Two and answered in Tagalog, question put him in A doctor who used his knowledge to prepare
English a poison to kill his victim in such a way as to
 Mere illiteracy is not sufficient to constitute a mitigating circumstance there must also be avoid detection, maybe considered as having
lack of intelligence. taken advantage of his high degree of
 When the offender is a city resident who knows how to sign his name. instruction and education.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: The accused was a lawyer, was not

 Lack of education must be proved positively and cannot be based on mere deduction or considered aggravating in physical injuries.
inference.
 Lack of instruction cannot be raised for the first time in the appellate court – it is for the
trial court to find and consider the circumstance of lack of instruction.

EXEMPTIONS:
Lack of instruction or low degree of education is mitigating in almost all crimes EXCEPT:
 Crime against property (estafa, theft, robbery and arson)
 Crime against chastity (rape, adultery)
 Treason because love of country should be natural of every citizen, except, considered
mitigating in People vs Marasigan, 85 Phil 427 – his schooling was confined in studying
and finishing canton only.
 In murder – because to kill someone is forbidden by natural law which every rational
being is endowed to know and feel.