Bar
2
I. Bruno was charged with homicide for killing the 75-year old owner of his rooming house. The prosecution proved that Bruno stabbed the owner causing his death; and that the killing happened at 10 in the evening in the house where the victim and Bruno lived. Bruno, on the other hand, successfully proved that he voluntarily surrendered to the authorities; that he pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it was the victim who first attacked and did so without any provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he prevailed because he managed to draw his knife with which he stabbed the victim. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal. Assuming a judgment of conviction and after considering the attendant circumstances, what penalty should the judge impose? Suggested Answer: The judge should impose a penalty of ARRESTO MAYOR, a penalty which is three degrees lower from Reclusion Perpetua. Under the law, when there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance, the penalty imposable shall be lowered by one degree. And if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to justify the same, a penalty lower by one to two degrees than that prescribed by law shall be imposed. In this case there are two ordinary mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty without any aggravating circumstance, which makes the penalty one degree lower. And the presence of two essential requisites for justification furthermore lowers the penalty by two degrees. The penalty imposable therefore is Arresto Mayor. Explanation Mitigating Circumstance There are two ordinary mitigating circumstances in this case. Namely: (a) Voluntary Surrender; and (b) Plea of guilty; and Two Privileged mitigating, namely: (a) Unlawful aggression; and (b) Lack of sufficient provocation. Although Voluntary Surrender and Plea of guilty are in the same subsection of article 13, when both are
description
Question 1.- Not mine.
Transcript of Bar
I.
Bruno was charged with homicide for killing the 75-year old owner of his rooming house. The prosecution proved that Bruno stabbed the owner causing his death; and that the killing happened at 10 in the evening in the house where the victim and Bruno lived. Bruno, on the other hand, successfully proved that he voluntarily surrendered to the authorities; that he pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it was the victim who first attacked and did so without any provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he prevailed because he managed to draw his knife with which he stabbed the victim. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal.
Assuming a judgment of conviction and after considering the attendant circumstances, what penalty should the judge impose?
Suggested Answer:
The judge should impose a penalty of ARRESTO MAYOR, a penalty which is three degrees lower from Reclusion Perpetua. Under the law, when there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance, the penalty imposable shall be lowered by one degree. And if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some of the conditions required to justify the same, a penalty lower by one to two degrees than that prescribed by law shall be imposed. In this case there are two ordinary mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty without any aggravating circumstance, which makes the penalty one degree lower. And the presence of two essential requisites for justification furthermore lowers the penalty by two degrees. The penalty imposable therefore is Arresto Mayor.
Explanation Mitigating Circumstance
There are two ordinary mitigating circumstances in this case. Namely: (a) Voluntary Surrender; and (b) Plea of guilty; and Two Privileged mitigating, namely: (a) Unlawful aggression; and (b) Lack of sufficient provocation. Although Voluntary Surrender and Plea of guilty are in the same subsection of article 13, when both are present, they should have the effect of mitigating as two independent circumstance.
