Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 67 views

    People v. Acuram

    Uploaded by

    vina
    This document summarizes a court case from the Philippines involving a man, Manabat, who was shot and killed after an altercation with passengers in a jeepney. The shooter, Orlando, who was a policeman riding in the jeepney, was charged with the death. Orlando claimed he did not fire the shot and blamed inadequate medical treatment for Manabat's death. However, the court ruled that the proximate cause of death was the gunshot wound from Orlando, and delays in treatment did not constitute an "efficient intervening cause" that would absolve Orlando of criminal responsibility. The court found Orlando criminally liable for Manabat's death.

    Copyright:

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

    People v. Acuram

    Uploaded by

    vina
    67 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case from the Philippines involving a man, Manabat, who was shot and killed after an altercation with passengers in a jeepney. The shooter, Orlando, who was a policeman riding in the jeepney, was charged with the death. Orlando claimed he did not fire the shot and blamed inadequate medical treatment for Manabat's death. However, the court ruled that the proximate cause of death was the gunshot wound from Orlando, and delays in treatment did not constitute an "efficient intervening cause" that would absolve Orlando of criminal responsibility. The court found Orlando criminally liable for Manabat's death.

    Original Title

    47. PEOPLE V. ACURAM

    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 document summarizes a court case from the Philippines involving a man, Manabat, who was shot and killed after an altercation with passengers in a jeepney. The shooter, Orlando, who was a policeman riding in the jeepney, was charged with the death. Orlando claimed he did not fire the shot and blamed inadequate medical treatment for Manabat's death. However, the court ruled that the proximate cause of death was the gunshot wound from Orlando, and delays in treatment did not constitute an "efficient intervening cause" that would absolve Orlando of criminal responsibility. The court found Orlando criminally liable for Manabat's death.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    67 views2 pages

    People v. Acuram

    Uploaded by

    vina
    This document summarizes a court case from the Philippines involving a man, Manabat, who was shot and killed after an altercation with passengers in a jeepney. The shooter, Orlando, who was a policeman riding in the jeepney, was charged with the death. Orlando claimed he did not fire the shot and blamed inadequate medical treatment for Manabat's death. However, the court ruled that the proximate cause of death was the gunshot wound from Orlando, and delays in treatment did not constitute an "efficient intervening cause" that would absolve Orlando of criminal responsibility. The court found Orlando criminally liable for Manabat's death.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    47. PEOPLE V. ACURAM - G.R. No.

    117954 (April 27, 2000)


    Facts: On June 29, 1991, at about 7:00 o'clock in the evening, Manabat and his companions went to the
    market to buy fish. Since no fish was available at that time, they decided to go home instead. They went to
    the national highway, stood at the right side and waited for a ride there. They flagged down an
    approaching passenger jeepney which, however, swerved dangerously towards them. At this juncture,
    Manabat shouted at the jeep "Pesteng yawa-a kamo, Manligis man kamo" (You devils, why did you try to
    run over us?). A passenger inside the jeepney shouted back "Noano man diay, isog mo?" (Why? Are you
    brave?). Immediately thereafter, two gunshots rang out in the air, accompanied by sparks coming from the
    front right side of the jeepney. Then Manabat shouted, "Agay. I was shot." The vehicle did not stop but
    instead speeded towards the direction of Cagayan de Oro City.
    Wounded on the right knee, Rolando was brought by his companions to the Cagayan de Oro
    Medical Center. Later on, they were informed that Rolando needed blood transfusion and so they
    transferred him at around 11:25 P.M. to the Northern Mindanao Regional Hospital in the same city. Upon
    arrival at the hospital, Manabat’s BP was found to be just over zero (40/0) and the victim's right leg was
    heavily bandaged. He was operated when the BP stabilized but still died the next day.
    The doctor testified that the death was due to massive loss of blood due to gunshot wound. The
    doctor stated that under normal circumstances, the wound would not necessarily cause death but in this
    case where the wound transected the major part of the leg, the wound was fatal. He clarified that the
    victim sustained only one gunshot wound which entered at the front portion of the right knee and exited
    at the back of the right knee, causing two wounds.
    Upon investigation, It was discovered that Orlando was a policeman who was among the
    passengers of the errant jeepney. He was seated at the front, right side of the jeepney and was the only
    one among its passengers who was carrying a firearm. He later on surrendered and when charged entered
    a plea of not guilty.
    During the trial, he admitted that he was on board the mentioned jeepney and had a gun at that
    time but denied firing it. He claimed that it was impossible for him to fire his rifle during that time since he
    was sitting at the front seat of the jeepney, sandwiched between the driver and the latter's father-in-law.
    Moreover, he said that the rifle was locked and wrapped by his jacket and its barrel was even pointed
    towards the driver.
    Orlando also, in his attempt to exculpate himself, blames the death of the victim on the lack of
    prompt and proper medical attention given. He insists that the delay in giving proper medical attendance
    to the victim constitutes an efficient intervening cause which exempts him from criminal responsibility.

    Issue: W/N the doctors can be held liable for the death of the victim Manabat?
    Ruling: No. We cannot hold the attending doctors liable for the death of the victim. The perceived delay in
    giving medical treatment to the victim does not break at all the causal connection between the wrongful
    act of the appellant and the injuries sustained by the victim. It does not constitute efficient intervening
    cause.

    The proximate cause of the death of the deceased is the shooting by Orlando. It is settled that anyone
    inflicting injuries is responsible for all the consequences of his criminal act such as death that supervenes in
    consequence of the injuries. The fact that the injured did not receive proper medical attendance would not
    affect Orlando's criminal responsibility. The rule is founded on the practical policy of closing to the
    wrongdoer a convenient avenue of escape from the just consequences of his wrongful act. If the rule were
    otherwise, many criminals could avoid just accounting for their acts by merely establishing a doubt as to
    the immediate cause of death.

    You might also like