Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 354 views

    People v. Amit

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous fL9dwyfek
    The defendant, Marcelo Amit, pleaded guilty to rape with homicide. He claimed the penalty of death should be reduced to life imprisonment due to mitigating circumstances. However, the court found that Amit's acts of boxing and choking his victim, who was much older than him, were reasonably sufficient to cause her death. The court held that the penalty of death applies regardless of mitigating circumstances, especially given the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength. The court noted that illness or mental disorder could be considered a mitigating circumstance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People v. Amit

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous fL9dwyfek
    354 views1 page
    The defendant, Marcelo Amit, pleaded guilty to rape with homicide. He claimed the penalty of death should be reduced to life imprisonment due to mitigating circumstances. However, the court found that Amit's acts of boxing and choking his victim, who was much older than him, were reasonably sufficient to cause her death. The court held that the penalty of death applies regardless of mitigating circumstances, especially given the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength. The court noted that illness or mental disorder could be considered a mitigating circumstance.

    Original Description:

    asaa

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The defendant, Marcelo Amit, pleaded guilty to rape with homicide. He claimed the penalty of death should be reduced to life imprisonment due to mitigating circumstances. However, the court found that Amit's acts of boxing and choking his victim, who was much older than him, were reasonably sufficient to cause her death. The court held that the penalty of death applies regardless of mitigating circumstances, especially given the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength. The court noted that illness or mental disorder could be considered a mitigating circumstance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    354 views1 page

    People v. Amit

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous fL9dwyfek
    The defendant, Marcelo Amit, pleaded guilty to rape with homicide. He claimed the penalty of death should be reduced to life imprisonment due to mitigating circumstances. However, the court found that Amit's acts of boxing and choking his victim, who was much older than him, were reasonably sufficient to cause her death. The court held that the penalty of death applies regardless of mitigating circumstances, especially given the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength. The court noted that illness or mental disorder could be considered a mitigating circumstance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    PEOPLE v.

    AMIT [32 SCRA 95 (1970)]


    Facts: Marcelo Amit was charged with the complex crime of rape with homicide (Art.
    335, RPC, as amended). He pleaded guilty and the court sentenced him to death, with
    accessories prescribed by law; to indemnify the heirs and pay the costs. He claims that
    the penalty of death should be reduced to reclusion perpetua because of the mitigating
    circumstances of plea of guilty, voluntary surrender, and lack of intention to commit so
    grave a wrong.
    Held: Lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong as the one actually committed,
    because of its nature, must necessarily be judged in the light of the acts committed by
    him & the circumstances under which they are committed. Should they show a great
    disproportion between the means employed to accomplish the criminal act, one the one
    hand, & its consequences, on the other, the mitigating circumstance must be considered
    in favor of the accused. At the time of the commission of the crime, the accused was 32
    years of age, while his victim was 25 years his senior, and when the latter resisted his
    attempt to rape her by biting and scratching him, to subdue her, the accused boxed her
    and then held her on the neck and pressed it down, while she was lying on her back
    and he was on top of her, these acts were reasonably sufficient to produce the result
    that they actually produced the death of the victim. The penalty of death prescribed in
    the last paragraph of Art. 335 of the RPC, as amended by RA. 2632 and 4111 being an
    indivisible penalty, it has to be imposed regardless of the presence of mitigating
    circumstances, especially in a case like the present where there are aggravating
    circumstances of nighttime and abuse of superior strength (Art. 63(1), RPC) Illness of
    the offender considered mitigating. Example of illness of the nerves or moral faculty.
    "Although she is mentally sane, we, however, are inclined to extend our sympathy to the
    appellant because of her misfortunes and weak character. According to the report she is
    suffering from a mild behaviour disorder as a consequence of the illness she had in
    early life. We are willing to regard this as a mitigating circumstance under Art. 13,
    Revised Penal Code, either in paragraph 9 or in paragraph 10."

    You might also like