MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES are those which, if present in the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty.
> One single fact cannot be made the basis of more than one mitigating circumstance. Hence, a mitigating circumstance arising from a single fact, absorbs all the other mitigating circumstances arising from the same fact.
BASIS: Diminution of either freedom of action, intelligence, or intent, or on the lesser perversity of the offender.
CLASSES:
ORDINARY
PRIVILEGED
Par 1. INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRUMSTANCES
> Applies, when all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability are NOT attendant.
> It is considered a privileged mitigating circumstance, provided, majority of the elements required to justify or exempt are present.
> But in the case of “incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives, and defense of a stranger,” unlawful aggression must be present, it being an indispensable requisite.
Par 2. UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD
> It is the age of the accused at the time of the commission of the crime which should be determined. His age at the time of trial is immaterial.
LEGAL EFFECTS OF VARIOUS AGES OF OFFENDER
15 and below – exempting
Privileged mitigating circumstance
Above 15 but under 18 – exempting unless acted with discernment – But even with discernment, penalty is reduced by one (1) degree lower than that imposed. (Art 68, par 2, amended by RA 9344)
Minor delinquent under 18 years of age – sentence suspended (Art 192, PD 603 as amended by PD 1179, referred to as Children in Conflict with the Law under RA 9344).
Child in Conflict with the Law – refers to a child who is alleged as, accused of, or being adjudged as, having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
18 years or over – full criminal responsibility
70 years or over – mitigating, no imposition of death penalty if already imposed execution of death penalty is suspended and committed
BASIS: Diminution of intelligence
Par 3. NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG (Praeter Intentionem)
> Offender did not intend to commit so grave a wrong
> Disproportion of the means employed to execute the crime and the consequences produced
Rule for the application:
Can be taken into account only when the facts proven show that there is a notable and evident disproportion between the means employed to execute the criminal act and its consequences.
> Intention may be ascertained by considering:
(a) The weapon used
(b) The part of the body injured
(c) The injury inflicted
(d) The manner it is inflicted
> Not applicable to felonies by negligence.
> Not applicable to felonies where intention is immaterial.
> Not appreciated in murder qualified by treachery (Reyes).
BASIS: Lack or diminution of intent
Par 4. PROVOCATION OR THREAT
PROVOCATION is understood as any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating any one.
REQUISITES:
(1) The provocation must be sufficient.
> Sufficient means adequate to excite a person to commit the wrong and must accordingly be proportionate to its gravity (People vs. Nabora, 73 Phil 434, 435)
> Depends on:
(a) The act constituting the provocation
(b) The social standing of the person provoked
(c) The place and time when the provocation is made
(2) It must originate from the offended party.
(3) The provocation must be personal and directed at the accused.
(4) The provocation must be immediate to the commission of the crime by the person who is provoked.
> The threat should not be offensive and positively strong. Otherwise, the threat to inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression, which may give rise to self-defense.
BASIS: Diminution of intelligence and intent
Par 5. IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF RELATIVES OR HIMSELF or VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE
REQUISITES:
(1) That there must be a grave offense done to the one committing the felony; his spouse; ascendants; descendants; legitimate, natural or adopted brothers
or sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
(2) That the felony is committed in immediate vindication of such grave offense.
> “Immediate” allows a lapse of time unlike in sufficient provocation, as long as the offender is still suffering from the mental agony brought by the offense to him.
To determine whether the personal offense is grave, the following must be considered:
(1) Social standing of the person
(2) Time when the insult was made
(3) Place where the insult was made
(4) Sometimes, even the age is considered
BASIS: Diminution of the conditions of voluntariness
Par 6. PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
> The infliction of injury must be immediate from the act that caused passion or obfuscation.
ELEMENTS:
(1) The accused acted upon an impulse.
(2) The impulse must be so powerful that it naturally produced passion or obfuscation.
REQUISITES:
(1) That here be an act, both unlawful and sufficient to produce such a condition of mind
(2) That said act which produced the obfuscation was not far removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable length of time, during which the perpetrator might recover his normal equanimity.
(3) The act causing such obfuscation was committed by the victim himself.
> The passion or obfuscation should arise from lawful sentiments in order to be mitigating.
> May lawfully arise from causes existing only in the honest belief of the offender.
BASIS: Loss of reasoning and self-control, thereby diminishing the exercise of his willpower.
Passion or Obfuscation is NOT mitigating when committed:
(1) In the spirit of lawlessness
(2) In the spirit of revenge
Passion or obfuscation cannot CO-EXIST with:
(1) Vindication of grave offense
(2) Treachery
Par 7. SURRENDER AND CONFESSION OF GUILT
TWO MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
(1) Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or his agents.
(2) Voluntary confession of guilt before the court prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
> If both are present in the same case they have the effect of two independent circumstances (People vs. Fontalba, 61 Phil 589) and in the absence of aggravating circumstances, they will reduce divisible penalties by one degree (Art 64[5]).
REQUISITES OF VOLUNTARY SURRENDER:
(1) That the offender had not been actually arrested
(2) That the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latter’s agents
> Person in authority is one directly vested with jurisdiction which is the power to govern and execute the laws, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or governmental corporation, board or commission.
> Agent of a person in authority is one who by direct provision of the law or by election, or by appointment by competent authority is charged with the maintenance of public order, and the protection and security of life and property, and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority (Art 152 as amended by RA 1978).
(3) That the surrender was voluntary.
A surrender to be voluntary must be spontaneous, showing the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities, either because:
(1) He acknowledges his guilt.
(2) He wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred in the search and capture.
REQUISITES FOR VOLUNTARY PLEA OF GUILTY:
(1) That the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt.
(2) That the confession of guilt was made in open court, that is, before the competent court that is to try the case.
(3) That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
> Even after arraignment, voluntary confession can still be mitigating, when with the consent of the public prosecutor, there is an amendment in the information.
> Voluntary confession is usually done during the arraignment.
> What has been admitted need not be proven by evidence; judgment can already be rendered but both sides can still present evidence to prove aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
> During arraignment, charges must be read to the accused in open court in a language known to him; if the charges are read in a language not known to him, the arraignment or plea is void. It is the duty of courts to read charges in a language known to him.
> Promulgation is physical and actual reading of the sentence to the accused. It can be limited to just the dispositive portion or “wherefore” clause. If there is an acquittal, the decision is final and executory and not appealable because of the risk of double jeopardy (People vs. Ang Cho Kio, 95 Phil 475). If there is a conviction, the accused has 15 days to avail of legal remedies, if not availed after the said period, the conviction becomes final and executor.
REASON: Plea of guilty is an act of repentance and respect for law; it indicates a moral disposition in the accused, favorable to his reform.
BASIS: Lesser perversity of the offender
Par 8. PHYSICAL DEFECT OF THE OFFENDER
> When the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from some physical defect, restricting his means of action, defense or communication with other
> The physical defect must relate to the offense committed. E.g. blindness does not mitigate estafa
BASIS: Offender does not have complete freedom of action; diminution of freedom and voluntariness
Par 9. ILLNESS OF THE OFFENDER
REQUISITES:
(1) That the illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his willpower.
(2) That such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts.
> Includes illness of the mind not amounting to insanity.
BASIS: Diminution of intelligence and intent
Par 10. SIMILAR ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
EXAMPLES:
(1) Impulse of jealousy, similar to passion and obfuscation.
(2) Testifying for the prosecution, analogous to plea of guilty.
(3) Over 60 years old will failing sight, similar to over 70 years of age under par 2.
