Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 211 views

    People vs. Likiran

    Uploaded by

    Royce Ann Pedemonte
    1) The defendant Jenny Likiran, alias "Loloy", was convicted of murder for stabbing the victim Sareno during a fight at a dance. 2) While another person shot Sareno, the court's doctrine is that if a deadly act such as stabbing contributes to the victim's death, the person is criminally liable even if other factors also contributed. 3) Here, the court found that Likiran's stabbing of Sareno contributed to his death from multiple gunshot wounds and the stab wound, so Likiran was found guilty of murder.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Likiran

    Uploaded by

    Royce Ann Pedemonte
    211 views3 pages
    1) The defendant Jenny Likiran, alias "Loloy", was convicted of murder for stabbing the victim Sareno during a fight at a dance. 2) While another person shot Sareno, the court's doctrine is that if a deadly act such as stabbing contributes to the victim's death, the person is criminally liable even if other factors also contributed. 3) Here, the court found that Likiran's stabbing of Sareno contributed to his death from multiple gunshot wounds and the stab wound, so Likiran was found guilty of murder.

    Original Title

    PEOPLE VS. LIKIRAN

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The defendant Jenny Likiran, alias "Loloy", was convicted of murder for stabbing the victim Sareno during a fight at a dance. 2) While another person shot Sareno, the court's doctrine is that if a deadly act such as stabbing contributes to the victim's death, the person is criminally liable even if other factors also contributed. 3) Here, the court found that Likiran's stabbing of Sareno contributed to his death from multiple gunshot wounds and the stab wound, so Likiran was found guilty of murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    211 views3 pages

    People vs. Likiran

    Uploaded by

    Royce Ann Pedemonte
    1) The defendant Jenny Likiran, alias "Loloy", was convicted of murder for stabbing the victim Sareno during a fight at a dance. 2) While another person shot Sareno, the court's doctrine is that if a deadly act such as stabbing contributes to the victim's death, the person is criminally liable even if other factors also contributed. 3) Here, the court found that Likiran's stabbing of Sareno contributed to his death from multiple gunshot wounds and the stab wound, so Likiran was found guilty of murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

    JENNY LIKIRAN alias "Loloy"

    G.R. No. 201858


    Date: June 4, 2014

    I. Ticker

    Victim Sareno’s cause of death: 


    Immediate cause : DOA 
    Antecedent cause : Multiple gunshot wounds
    Underlying cause : Stab wound scapular area (L)

    II. Doctrine

    Direct, natural and logical consequence

    If a person inflicts a wound with a deadly weapon in such a manner as to


    put life in jeopardy and death follows as a consequence of their felonious
    act, it does not alter its nature or diminish its criminality to prove that
    other causes cooperated in producing the factual result. The offender is
    criminally liable for the death of the victim if his delictual act caused,
    accelerated or contributed to the death of the victim. A different doctrine
    would tend to give immunity to crime and to take away from human life a
    salutary and essential safeguard. 

    III. Facts

     While Mercado and Goloceno were inside the dance area, Jerome
    Likiran3 (Jerome), the accused-appellant’s brother, punched Mercado on
    the mouth. Goloceno was about to assist Mercado when he saw that
    Jerome was armed with a short firearm while the accused-appellant was
    holding a hunting knife, so he backed off.
     Dagangon and Sareno, who were outside the dance area, heard the
    commotion. Afterwards, Jerome approached Sareno and shot him
    several times. With Sareno fallen, the accused-appellant stabbed him on
    the back. It was Dagangon who saw the incident first-hand as he was
    only three meters from where Sareno was. Dagangon was able to bring
    Sareno to the hospital only after Jerome and the accused-appellant left,
    but Sareno was already dead at that point. Sareno suffered multiple
    gunshot wounds and a stab wound at the left scapular area. 4
     The accused-appellant denied any involvement in the crime. While he
    admitted that he was at the dance, he did not go outside when the
    commotion happened. He and Jerome stayed within the area where the
    sound machine was located and they only heard the gunshots outside.
    Other witnesses testified in the accused-appellant’s defense, with Edgar
    Indanon testifying that he saw the stabbing incident and that it was some
    other unknown person, and not the accused-appellant, who was the
    culprit; and Eleuterio Quiñopa stating that he was with the accused-
    appellant and Jerome inside the dance hall at the time the commotion
    occurred.
     Prosecution witness Dagangon’s positive identification of the accused-
    appellant was held sufficient by the RTC to convict the latter of the crime
    of murder.6 The RTC also rejected the accused-appellant’s defense of
    denial as it was not supported by evidence. It also ruled that alibi cannot
    favor the accused-appellant since he failed to prove that it was
    impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime on the night of March
    19, 2000.7
     The accused-appellant also asserted that the information charged him of
    murder committed by attacking, assaulting, stabbing and shooting
    Sareno, thereby causing his instantaneous death.
     The pre-trial agreement issued by the RTC states that the Certificate of
    Death issued by Dr. Cidric Dael (Dr. Dael) of the Bukidnon Provincial
    Hospital and reviewed by the Rural Health Physician of Malaybalay City
    "is admitted as proof of fact and cause of death due to multiple stab
    wound scapular area."24
     The accused-appellant is criminally liable for the natural and logical
    consequence resulting from his act of stabbing Sareno. It may be that he
    was not the shooter but the stab wound he inflicted on Sareno
    contributed to the latter’s death. 
     RTC GUILTY,CA AFFIRMED.

    IV. Issues

    Whether or not death of Sereno is the natural and logical consequence


    resulting from the act of Likiran.

    V. Decision/Ruling

    YES.

    More importantly, the accused-appellant is criminally liable for the natural


    and logical consequence resulting from his act of stabbing Sareno. It
    may be that he was not the shooter, it is nevertheless true that the stab
    wound he inflicted on Sareno contributed to the latter’s death. In Quinto
    v. Andres,30 the Court stated that:

    If a person inflicts a wound with a deadly weapon in such a manner as to


    put life in jeopardy and death follows as a consequence of their felonious
    act, it does not alter its nature or diminish its criminality to prove that
    other causes cooperated in producing the factual result. The offender is
    criminally liable for the death of the victim if his delictual act caused,
    accelerated or contributed to the death of the victim. A different doctrine
    would tend to give immunity to crime and to take away from human life a
    salutary and essential safeguard. x x x[.]31 (Citations omitted and
    emphasis ours)

    You might also like