TUBAGBOHOL.com with Ligalig Mike Ortega

The Philippines => Philippine Laws => Topic started by: MIKELIGALIG.com on December 18, 2009, 06:43:38 PM

Title: Difficult Bar Exam Question: Criminal Law Review
Post by: MIKELIGALIG.com on December 18, 2009, 06:43:38 PM
Jose employed Mario as gardener and Henry as cook. They learned that Jose won P500,000.00 in the lotto, and decided to rob him. Mario positioned himself about 30 meters away from Jose’s house and acted as lookout. For his part, Henry surreptitiously gained entry into the house and killed Jose who was then having his dinner. Henry found the P500,000.00 and took it. Henry then took a can of gasoline from the garage and burned the house to conceal the acts. Mario and Henry fled, but were arrested around 200 meters away from the house by alert barangay tanods. The tanods recovered the P500,000.00.

Mario and Henry were charged with and convicted of robbery with homicide, with the aggravating circumstances of arson, dwelling, and nighttime. Mario moved to reconsider the decision maintaining that he was not at the scene of the crime and was not aware that Henry killed the victim; hence, he was guilty only of robbery, as an accomplice. Mario also claimed that he conspired with Henry to commit robbery but not to kill Jose. Henry, likewise, moved to reconsider the decision, asserting that he is liable only for attempted robbery with homicide with no aggravating circumstance, considering that he and Mario did not benefit from the P500,000.00. He further alleged that arson is a felony and not an aggravating circumstance; dwelling is not aggravating in attempted robbery with homicide; and nighttime is not aggravating because the house of Jose was lighted at the time he was killed.

Resolve with reasons the respective motions of Mario and Henry. (7%)
Powered by SMFPacks SEO Pro Mod | Sitemap
Mobile View
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2020, SimplePortal