Plaintiff-Appellee Vs Vs Defendant-Appellant Jose Ma. Capili, Attorney-General Jaranilla
Plaintiff-Appellee Vs Vs Defendant-Appellant Jose Ma. Capili, Attorney-General Jaranilla
Plaintiff-Appellee Vs Vs Defendant-Appellant Jose Ma. Capili, Attorney-General Jaranilla
EN BANC
[G.R. No. 32066. March 15, 1930.]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS , plaintiff-appellee, vs .
GONA (Mansaca) , defendant-appellant.
The defendant was charged before the Court of First Instance of the Province of
Davao with the crime of homicide, the information reading as follows:
"That on or about October 26, 1928, in the municipal district of Pantukan,
Province of Davao, Philippine Islands, and within the jurisdiction of the court, the
said accused voluntarily, illegally, and criminally and with a bolo which he then
carried, assaulted the Mansaca Mapudul, causing him a mortal wound on the left
side of the neck and that, as a consequence of said wound, the said Mapudul
died."
Upon trial the court below found the defendant guilty as charged in the
information and taking into consideration the extenuating circumstance of non-habitual
intoxication, sentenced him to suffer twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal
with the accessory penalties prescribed by law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased
in the sum of P1,000, and to pay the costs. From this sentence the defendant appealed.
It appears from the evidence that on the evening of October 26, 1928, a number
of Mansacas celebrated a reunion in the house of the Mansaca Gabriel. There seems to
have been a liberal supply of alcoholic drinks and some of the men present became
intoxicated, with the result that a quarrel took place between the Mansaca Dunca and
the defendant. Dunca and his son Aguipo eventually left the house and were followed by
Mapudul and one Awad. The defendant left the house about the same time with
intention of assaulting Dunca, but in the darkness of the evening and in the intoxicated
condition of the defendant, he mistook Mapudul for Dunca and in icted on him a mortal
wound with a bolo.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2016
cdasiaonline.com
There can be no doubt that the defendant killed Mapudul and that he is guilty of
the crime charged, but his attorney argues that in view of the fact that said defendant
had no intention to kill the deceased and committed the crime by mistake, he should
have been found guilty of homicide through negligence under paragraph 1 of article 568
of the Penal Code and not of the graver crime of intentional homicide. This contention
is contrary to earlier decisions of this court. In the case of United States vs. Mendieta
(34 Phil., 242), the court said:
"Even admitting that the defendant intended to injure Hilario Lauigan
instead of Pedro Acierto, even that, in view of the mortal wound which he inflicted
upon the latter, in no way could be considered as a relief from his criminal act.
That he made a mistake in killing one man instead of another, when it is proved
that he acted maliciously and willfully, cannot relieve him from criminal
responsibility. Neither do we believe that the fact that he made a mistake in killing
the wrong man should be considered as a mitigating circumstance."
The appealed sentence is af rmed with the costs against the defendant. So
ordered.
cdasiaonline.com