The Supreme Court case involved the shooting of a victim while seated on a bench outside his house. The Court was asked if this constituted an aggravating circumstance of dwelling, where a crime is committed in the victim's home. The Court answered no, finding that while the bench was beside the house steps, it was not an integral part of the dwelling and thus the circumstance did not apply to the killing.
The Supreme Court case involved the shooting of a victim while seated on a bench outside his house. The Court was asked if this constituted an aggravating circumstance of dwelling, where a crime is committed in the victim's home. The Court answered no, finding that while the bench was beside the house steps, it was not an integral part of the dwelling and thus the circumstance did not apply to the killing.
The Supreme Court case involved the shooting of a victim while seated on a bench outside his house. The Court was asked if this constituted an aggravating circumstance of dwelling, where a crime is committed in the victim's home. The Court answered no, finding that while the bench was beside the house steps, it was not an integral part of the dwelling and thus the circumstance did not apply to the killing.
The Supreme Court case involved the shooting of a victim while seated on a bench outside his house. The Court was asked if this constituted an aggravating circumstance of dwelling, where a crime is committed in the victim's home. The Court answered no, finding that while the bench was beside the house steps, it was not an integral part of the dwelling and thus the circumstance did not apply to the killing.
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1
G.R. Nos. 94992-93.
April 7, 1993. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENJAMIN RAMIREZ SARINO et al. REGALADO, J
QUESTION: The victim was shot
while seated on a bench outside his house. Was the killing attended by aggravating circumstance of dwelling? ANSWER: No. The bench was beside the steps leading to the door of the house, it cannot be considered as an integral part or a dependency of the victim's dwelling.
Robert E. Douglas v. Ronald H. Cathel, Administrator of New Jersey State Prison The Attorney General of The State of New Jersey, Zulima Farber., 456 F.3d 403, 3rd Cir. (2006)
