Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > November 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. 4581 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PABILO ESCALONA

012 Phil 54:



[G.R. No. 4581. November 16, 1908. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PABILO ESCALONA, Defendant-Appellant.

Jose R. Lahesa, for Appellant.

Attorney-General Villamor, for Appellee.


1. ASSAULT; CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY; HOMICIDE. — An individual who unlawfully inflicts wounds upon another person which result in the death of the latter, is guilty of the crime of homicide, and the fact that the injured person did not receive proper medical attention does not affect the criminal responsibility.



This case was submitted to this court on appeal by the accused against the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, by which he was sentenced to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, to the accessory penalties, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000, and to pay the costs. On appeal, it appears:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

That, in this instance, the defense admits that the wounding of Bernardino Pisieng by Pablo Escalona can not be denied, but questions the liability of the accused for the death of the wounded man, which took place sixty days after he was injured; and further objects, that the defendant is treated as guilty of the crime of homicide when, as a matter of fact, he is only guilty of lesiones, and cites the testimony of the municipal inspector of health of the town, who examined the wounds, attended the wounded man, and certified to his death.

This witness testified that he attended Pisieng from the 24th of August, 1907, until his death on the 23d of October following; that Pisieng died in consequence of a wound on his wrist, which had not healed at the time of his death; that the wounded man had the tendons of the forearm severed and one of the bones broken; that three days after he was wounded he had an attack of fever which continued until he died. When the witness was expressly asked "whether he believed that, if the wounded man had been attended by a licensed surgeon, who might have made an amputation, if necessary, or assisted him in some other way, he would have recovered from the wound?" he

"I believe that he would have recovered and would not have died.

"Q. So that the death of the deceased was also due to your lack of scientific experience?

A. It may be, sir, but I did everything that I could, to the best of my knowledge and understanding."cralaw virtua1aw library

He stated that, when he examined the wounded man, he certified that the wounds could be cured within sixty days. It is proven that the injured man died at the end of sixty days, and of nothing but the wounds.

In the judgment in cassation rendered on the 22d of May, 1896, this doctrine is

"That, inasmuh as the jury has declared that the injured party died in consequence of the injury he received, the fact that, in answer to another question, their verdict was that he might have recovered, if he had received better attendance and there had been less carelessness, does not affect the correct classification of the deed as a crime of homicide, for the reason that the lack of attendance can not be attributed to the wounded man, the person who caused the wound being the one responsible for the result thereof."cralaw virtua1aw library

Hence, the classification of the crime is in accordance with the law, but the application of article 11 of the Penal Code as a mitigating circumstance, to wit, the question of race, does not appear to be proper. No aggravating or mitigating circumstance is present. The accused was a policeman under orders to serve a subpoena, who, when he was returning, and without any reason so far as the record shows, attacked with a bolo a man who was climbing out of a ravine. The penalty prescribed by article 4 [404] for the crime of homicide, should be imposed in the medium degree.

Therefore, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed, provided, however, that the penalty imposed upon Pablo Escalona shall be fourteen years, eight months, and one day, with the costs of this instance. So ordered.

Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Willard and Tracey, JJ., concur.

Back to Home | Back to Main

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review :

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line :

November-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 4621 November 2, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUANA AYARDI

    011 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. 3712 November 4, 1908 - CANDIDO CONCEPCION v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

    011 Phil 552

  • G.R. No. 3879 November 4, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PRUDENCIO ARCOS

    011 Phil 555

  • G.R. No. 4238 November 4, 1908 - FRANK B. INGERSOLL v. VENTURA CHUI-TIAN LAY, ET AL.

    011 Phil 564

  • G.R. No. 4605 November 4, 1908 - IGNACIO REMONTAN v. ALEJANDRO CABACUNGAN

    011 Phil 571

  • G.R. No. 4440 November 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. HILARIO GALANCO, ET AL.

    011 Phil 575

  • G.R. No. 4232 November 7, 1908 - FELIX BAUTISTA v. AQUILINA TIONGSON, ET AL.

    011 Phil 579

  • G.R. No. 4389 November 10, 1908 - GLICERIA MARELLA v. VICENTE REYES

    012 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. 3753 November 11, 1908 - HERRANZ & GARRIZ v. ROMAN BARBUDO

    012 Phil 5

  • G.R. No. 4515 November 11, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ISIDRO SERVILLAS

    012 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. 4777 November 11, 1908 - SUILIONG & CO. v. SILVINA CHIO-TAYSAN

    012 Phil 13

  • G.R. No. 4450 November 11, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LUCINA MACASPAC

    012 Phil 26

  • G.R. No. 4636 November 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RAMON NERI ABEJUELA

    012 Phil 30

  • G.R. No. 4476 November 14, 1908 - FELIX SAMSON, ET AL. v. MARIANO HONRADO

    012 Phil 37

  • G.R. No. 4517 November 14, 1908 - HIJOS DE I. DE LA RAMA v. VALENTIN INVENTOR

    012 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. 4523 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NICOLAS CARREON, ET AL.

    012 Phil 51

  • G.R. No. 4581 November 16, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PABILO ESCALONA

    012 Phil 54

  • G.R. No. 2994 November 18, 1908 - ILDEFONSA VARGAS v. AGATONA EGAMINO

    012 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. 4082 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MANUEL LORENZANA, ET AL.

    012 Phil 64

  • G.R. No. 4211 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SECUNDINO MENDEZONA

    012 Phil 72

  • G.R. No. 4457 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMONA ESCOBAÑAS

    012 Phil 80

  • G.R. No. 4607 November 18, 1908 - P. D. COLBERT v. E. M. BACHRACH

    012 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. 4740 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    012 Phil 87

  • G.R. No. 4774 November 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. A. H. BARNES

    012 Phil 93

  • G.R. No. 4779 November 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. VICTORIA VEDRA

    012 Phil 96

  • G.R. No. 4821 November 20, 1908 - J. McMICKING v. T. KIMURA, ET AL.

    012 Phil 98

  • G.R. No. 4314 November 21, 1908 - LORENZA QUISON, ET AL. v. HIGINA SALUD

    012 Phil 109

  • G.R. No. 4315 November 21, 1908 - KUENZLE & STREIFF v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    012 Phil 117

  • G.R. No. 4671 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. EMILIANO J. TORRES

    012 Phil 121

  • G.R. No. 4675 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RICARDO MENDIOLA

    012 Phil 125

  • G.R. No. 4722 November 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. TAN TAYCO, ET AL.

    012 Phil 127

  • G.R. No. 4597 November 23, 1908 - JOSE GARCIA RON v. LA COMPANIA DE MINAS DE BATAN

    012 Phil 130

  • G.R. No. 4795 November 23, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO BOSTON

    012 Phil 134

  • G.R. No. 4557 November 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AGAPITO ROSAL

    012 Phil 135

  • G.R. No. 1598 November 30, 1908 - JOSE PALACIOS v. MUNICIPALITY OF CAVITE

    012 Phil 140