FACTS:Albuquerque was found guilty of homicide against Manuel Osma. He was sentence to 8 years and 1 day imprisonment and ordered to indemnify the heir of the deceased in the sum of P 1, 000. Appellant went to the victim‘s workplace to compel him to marry his daughter or at least give support to her daughter since Osma is the father of the child. It led to a heated argument when Osma refused to do so. Appellant brought out his pen knife to wound Osma‘s face but eventually killing him when the blow landed on the base of neck.
Crime committed:Homicide
Contention of the State:Appellants‘ contention of acting in self-defense cannot be entered since
he provoked and commenced the aggression when he brought out and started shipping his knife. Contention of the Accused:Lack of intention to cause such a grave injury, his voluntary surrender and act of passion should be considered mitigating circumstances. The fatal blow was due to his lack of control.
HELD:Judgment modified. Sentenced to indeterminate penalty of one year of prision correctional to 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor.
C.LIABILITY FOR INCOMPLETE ELEMENTS
Impossible Crime RPC, Article 4 (2) By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or properties, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on the account of employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
INTOD v COURT OF APPEALS, 215 SCRA 52 FACTS:Mr. Sulpicio Intod and company wanted Bernardina Palangpangan killed because of land dispute in Katugunan, Lopez Jaena, Misamis Oriental. The guide of Mr. Intod, Mr. Salvador Mandaya, was threatened by the former that if he will not show the house of Palangpangan, they will also kill him. At 10:00 in the evening of February 4, 1979, the petitioner and aids to the crime accompanied by the guide, Mr. Mandaya arrived at the house of Palangpangan. There and then, the room of the target was pointed by Mandaya. Thereafter, the petitioner and companions fired at said room. It turned out, however, that Palangpangan was in another city and on one was in the room.
Crime committed:Attempted murder
Contention of the State: The accused is liable for impossible crimes and not for attempted murder. The factual situation in the case at bar presents a physical impossibility which rendered the intended crime impossible. Under Article 4 (2) of the RPC, such is sufficient to make the act and impossible crime. Factual impossibility incurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to actor or beyond control prevent consummations of intended crime.
Contention of the Accused:Intod is seeking from the CA a modification of the judgment by holding him liable for an impossible crime citing Article 4 (2) of the RPC. He contends that Palangpangan‘s absence from her room on that night, he and his companion riddled it with bullet made the crime inherently impossible.
HELD:Petition was granted.
PEOPLE VS. SALADINO, 89 PHIL. 807 FACTS:Lourdes Relevo is a niece of the accused-appelant Conrado Saladino. Her mother and Condrado‘s wife were sisters. Lourdes, 13 years old was sent by her parents to Manila to live with Conrado and Rosita in Pasig City in order for her to have her education. Rosita was a factory worker while Conrado is a money changer is a bus terminal. In September 1995 at about 10 0‘clock in the evening, while Lourdes was lying on her mattress resting and feeling sick, Conrado woke her up and ask her to transfer to the bed as she might catch cold. Rosita was already dressed up because she was works in the 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM shift. Conrado
accompanied Rosita to the jeepney stop and returned to their room about 15 minutes later. He laid down beside Lourdes and 25 minutes after, he started fondling her breasts, he poked a kitchen knife at her waist and threatened to kill her if she shouted. He dropped the knife and pinned down Lourdes‘s hands to her belly, removed her shorts and panty with his hands. He then removed his own shorts and underwear, went on top of Lourdes and inserted his penis inside her vagina. Lourdes struggled and Conrado‘s penis slipped out several times but he re- inserted it every time and resumed his movements. Lourdes confided the sexual assault to Rosita but did not believe her and even said that her husband is not capable of doing such act.The sexual assault was repeated on December 17, 1996 and again on January 2, 1997. Finally, Lourdes gathered enough courage and told her mother about the sexual abuses, which prompted Elena to fetch her and take her home to Batangas. Elena had Lourdes examined by a doctor, who confirmed that she was no longer virgin, hence, they filed a case with the Pasig City Prosecutors Office.
Crime committed:Rape and attempted rape
Contention of the State:The court observed that Conrado appeared to be evasive, answered questions in low voice which was hardly audible. It also pointed out that Conrado appeared uncertain when he admitted that he touched her breasts, kissed the lips and private parts of the complainant and laid on top of her. This led the court to conclude that the accused was not unjustly accused of a serious crime since it is very unlikely for a young girl like Lourdes to falsely accuse his uncle of a heinous crime, undergo medical examination of her private parts, subject herself to the humiliation of a public trial and tarnish her family‘s honor and reputation.
Contention of the Accused:On the night of the alleged first rape, he was drunk. After taking his wife to the jeepney stop, he went back to his room where she saw Lourdes lying on bed and laid beside her. Also, Lourdes was fully aware of what was happening yet did not show any reaction.The accused also testified that the reason they left the old house was because they did not have privacy and that Lourdes was seducing him. Lourdes would get angry every time he refused to insert his penis into her vagina.
HELD:Conrado Saladino, is found guilty of three counts of simple rape and sentence to supper the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. He is also ordered to pay private complainant P50, 000 for civil indemnity, another P 50, 000 for moral damages and P 30, 000 for exemplary damages. Also, guilty of attempted rape and sentence to 10 months and 20 days to 8 years, 4 months and 10 days and another P 15, 000 for moral damages.
UNCOMPLETED CRIMES ATTEMPTED FELONIES ARTICLE 6, RPC
Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. — Consummated felonies as well as those
which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance.
PEOPLE v CAMPUHAN, MARCH 30, 2000