Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1906 > March 1906 Decisions > G.R. No. 2735 March 29, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO REYES

006 Phil 38:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 2735. March 29, 1906. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. FRANCISCO REYES, Defendant-Appellant.

Marcelo Caringal, for Appellant.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE; "LESIONES." — The principal and most essential element of frustrated homicide is the intent on the part of the assailant to take the life of the person attacked, and such intent must be proved in a clear and evident manner, and when such intent is lacking but wounds are inflicted, the crime committed constitutes that of lesiones only.


D E C I S I O N


MAPA, J. :


The defendant in this case is charged with the crime of frustrated homicide. The court below found that the crime had been committed, convicted the defendant as the author thereof, and sentenced him to six years and one day imprisonment at hard labor, with costs.

The Attorney-General, in his brief filed in this court, contends that the facts established by the record do not show the commission of the crime of frustrated homicide but of lesiones menos graves, as provided for and penalized in article 418 of the Penal Code.

We agree with the contention of the Attorney-General. We have already held in the case of the United States v. Saturnino Trinidad, 1 No. 1851, that the principal and most essential element of attempted homicide (and the same thing may be said of the crime of frustrated homicide is the intent on the part of the assailant to take the life of the person attacked, and such intent must be proved in so clear and evident a manner as to exclude any doubt as to the real intention of the aggressor. And, as the Attorney-General properly says in his brief, there is nothing in the record which would show clearly and beyond doubt an intention on the part of the defendant to kill.

Therefore, it would not be proper to classify this crime as that of frustrated homicide. The acts committed by the accused constitute the crime of lesiones only, and the said lesiones having taken more than eight days and less than thirty to cure, they should be classified as menos graves, and the accused should be punished with arresto mayor or with banishment and a fine of from 325 to 3,250 pesetas, at the discretion of the court, in accordance with article 418 of the Penal Code. The evidence clearly shows that the defendant is guilty of the said assault.

Wherefore, we hereby reverse the judgment of the court below and sentence the defendant to three months of arresto mayor, from which shall be deducted one-half of the time he has served as a detention prisoner; to indemnify the offended party in the sum of 20 pesos, or in default thereof to suffer the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment at the rate of one day for every 2.50 pesos which he has to pay, and the costs of this instance. After the expiration of ten days from the date of final judgment, let the case be remanded to the Court of First Instance for execution of the said judgment. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, Carson and Willard, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. 4 Phil. Rep., 152.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1906 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 1904 March 3, 1906 - FRANCISCO GONZALEZ QUIROS v. CARLOS PALANCA TAN-GUINLAY

    005 Phil 675

  • G.R. No. 2763 March 3, 1906 - W.L. WRIGHT v. ALFRED F. SMITH, ET AL.

    005 Phil 681

  • G.R. No. 1451 March 6, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. AURELIO TOLENTINO

    005 Phil 682

  • G.R. No. 2500 March 8, 1906 - MARIA DE LA CONCEPCION MARTINEZ CAÑAS v. MARIANO TUASON, ET AL.

    005 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. 2645 March 8, 1906 - FRANCISCA CABREROS v. VICTORINO PROSPERO

    005 Phil 693

  • G.R. No. 1928 March 9, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. NICOMEDES DINGLASAN, ET AL.

    005 Phil 695

  • G.R. No. 2430 March 9, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN LEANDRO VILLARINO, ET AL.

    005 Phil 697

  • G.R. No. 2434 March 9, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. BERNARDO BOAC

    005 Phil 699

  • G.R. No. 1974 March 15, 1906 - CATHOLIC CHURCH v. A. W. HASTINGS, ET AL.

    005 Phil 701

  • G.R. No. 2020 March 15, 1906 - GERMANN & CO. v. LUIS R. YANGCO, ET AL.

    005 Phil 717

  • G.R. No. 2452 March 15, 1906 - MATILDE BALLESTER v. GONZALO LEGASPI

    005 Phil 722

  • G.R. No. 2600 March 15, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANK DE L. CARRINGTON

    005 Phil 725

  • G.R. No. 3139 March 15, 1906 - ALEJANDRO SANTOS v. CELESTINO VILLAFUERTE

    005 Phil 739

  • G.R. No. 2116 March 16, 1906 - BERNARDINO CACNIO v. LAZARO BAENS

    005 Phil 742

  • G.R. No. 2327 March 17, 1906 - LUIS PEREZ SAMANILLO v. W.A. WHALEY, ET AL.

    005 Phil 747

  • G.R. No. 2457 March 17, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. ANICETO DADACAY

    006 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. 2575 March 17, 1906 - MARIA DE LA CONCEPCION MARTINEZ CAÑAS v. MUNICIPALITY OF SAN MATEO

    006 Phil 3

  • G.R. No. 2570 March 21, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. ANASTASIO ASUNCION

    006 Phil 9

  • G.R. No. 2292 March 22, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO CASTRO

    006 Phil 10

  • G.R. No. 2721 March 22, 1906 - RAFAEL MOLINA v. ANTONIO DE LA RIVA

    006 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. 2603 March 26, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANK DE L. CARRINGTON

    006 Phil 20

  • G.R. No. 2695 March 26, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. DOMINGO YSIP

    006 Phil 26

  • G.R. No. 2733 March 27, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS ARCEO

    006 Phil 29

  • G.R. No. 1458 March 29, 1906 - MAX L. FORNOW v. J. C. HOFFMEISTER

    006 Phil 33

  • G.R. No. 2735 March 29, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO REYES

    006 Phil 38

  • G.R. No. 2969 March 29, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO J. REYES

    006 Phil 40

  • G.R. No. 1009 March 31, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. IGNACIO SANTA MARIA

    006 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. 1202 March 31, 1906 - FRANCISCO SAEZ CO-TIONGCO v. CO-QUING-CO

    006 Phil 46

  • G.R. No. 1922 March 31, 1906 - CITY OF MANILA v. FRANCISCO GAMBE

    006 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. 2336 March 31, 1906 - JOAQUIN PELLICENA CAMACHO v. LEONCIO GONZALEZ LIQUETE

    006 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. 2676 March 31, 1906 - UNITED STATES v. EUSTAQUIO HORCA

    006 Phil 52