Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 211 views

    Petitioners Respondents: Petitioner's Claims

    Uploaded by

    Cheska Borja
    This case involves a police officer, Artemio Mojica, who killed a constabulary soldier, Crispin Macasinag, during a brawl between police and constabulary officers. Mojica claims he acted in self-defense after Macasinag attacked him with a knife. The Supreme Court rules that Mojica's act of shooting Macasinag was justified self-defense under the Penal Code as Macasinag's aggression was unlawful, Mojica reasonably felt his life was in danger, and he was not at fault for provoking the attack. Mojica is acquitted of criminal liability for the killing.

    Copyright:

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

    Petitioners Respondents: Petitioner's Claims

    Uploaded by

    Cheska Borja
    211 views1 page
    This case involves a police officer, Artemio Mojica, who killed a constabulary soldier, Crispin Macasinag, during a brawl between police and constabulary officers. Mojica claims he acted in self-defense after Macasinag attacked him with a knife. The Supreme Court rules that Mojica's act of shooting Macasinag was justified self-defense under the Penal Code as Macasinag's aggression was unlawful, Mojica reasonably felt his life was in danger, and he was not at fault for provoking the attack. Mojica is acquitted of criminal liability for the killing.

    Original Description:

    Digest for U.S. v. Mojica

    Original Title

    Crim 09.08 12 Us v. Mojica

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves a police officer, Artemio Mojica, who killed a constabulary soldier, Crispin Macasinag, during a brawl between police and constabulary officers. Mojica claims he acted in self-defense after Macasinag attacked him with a knife. The Supreme Court rules that Mojica's act of shooting Macasinag was justified self-defense under the Penal Code as Macasinag's aggression was unlawful, Mojica reasonably felt his life was in danger, and he was not at fault for provoking the attack. Mojica is acquitted of criminal liability for the killing.

    Copyright:

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

    Petitioners Respondents: Petitioner's Claims

    Uploaded by

    Cheska Borja
    This case involves a police officer, Artemio Mojica, who killed a constabulary soldier, Crispin Macasinag, during a brawl between police and constabulary officers. Mojica claims he acted in self-defense after Macasinag attacked him with a knife. The Supreme Court rules that Mojica's act of shooting Macasinag was justified self-defense under the Penal Code as Macasinag's aggression was unlawful, Mojica reasonably felt his life was in danger, and he was not at fault for provoking the attack. Mojica is acquitted of criminal liability for the killing.

    Copyright:

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

    U.S. v.

    Mojica
    Case No. 17650 February 15, 1922 Ostrand
    Petitioners Respondents
    The United States Artemio Mojica
    SYNOPSIS:
    See below.

    PROCEDURAL HISTORY:
    Appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila

    FACTS OF THE CASE:


    In a brawl between Constabulary officers and the Manila Police, Artemio Mojica, a police officer, killed Crispin Macasinag,
    Constabulary solider, by firing a revolver, inflicting a fatal wound in the latter’s chest. Witnesses attest that Macasinag attacked
    Mojica with a knife before Mojica drew his revolver and shot him.

    Petitioner’s claims
    Mojica admits having killed Macasinag but maintains that he did so in self-defense and that he, therefore, is exempt from criminal
    liability.

    ISSUES: Ruling
    1. Whether aggression on Macasinag’s part justifies Mojica’s act of self-defense Yes

    RULING/RATIONALE:
    1. Yes, aggression on Macasinag’s part justifies Mojica’s act of self-defense. Considering the threatening attitude of Macasinag,
    Mojica had the best of reasons for believing that his life was in imminent danger. SC believes that the means he employed for
    his defense were, in the circumstances, reasonably necessary. Macasinag’s unlawful aggression is undisputed as it does not
    appear that Mojica, who according to evidence took no part in the brawl, provoked him. As to the use of the revolver that killed
    Macasinag, SC maintains that Mojica could hardly be expected to take deliberate and careful aim so as to strike a less
    vulnerable point in Macasinag’s body. Duty forbade him to run away and using a club would be ineffective against the knife
    Macasinag was wielding.

    LAWS, STATUTES, CODES INVOLVED:


    Penal Code Article 8(4)
    The following are exempt from criminal liability:
    4. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur:
    (1) Unlawful aggression;
    (2) Reasonable necessity for the means employed to prevent or repel it;
    (3) Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

    DISPOSITION:
    Decision of the trial court is reversed. Mojica is acquitted of the crime.

    DICTA RELATING TO DOCTRINE:


    N/A

    SEPARATE RULINGS:
    N/A

    CASES CITED IN CASE:


    N/A

    Made by: Borja, Francesca Tanya

    You might also like