Dosil Crim Digest November 2017 V2.docx

CASE DIGEST In Criminal Law Review [November 2014 Cases Re. Revised Penal Code]

By:

Mark Julius V Dosil 2015-12789-MN-0

TITLE: BOOK II – FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE Case: Guzman vs People November 26, 2014, G.R. No. 178512

Doctrine: That the petitioner already performed all the acts of execution that should produce the felony of homicide as a consequence, but did not produce it by reason of causes independent of his will, i.e., the timely medical attention accorded to the victim, he was properly found guilty of frustrated homicide.

Facts: On the fateful midnight of Christmas, 1997, while Alexander Flojo (Alexander) is fetching water, Alfredo de Guzman (Alfredo) suddenly appeared and stab Alexander in the left part of his body causing him to sustain two stab wounds. Cirilino Bantaya, Alexander’s son-in-law, who saw the incident, rushed him to the hospital. The attending physician said that one of the stab wounds is fatal and would have caused Alexander’s death if he did not get rushed to the hospital quickly. RTC found Alfredo guilty beyond reasonable doubt in the crime of frustrated homicide and was sentenced six months and 1 day of prision correccional as minimum to 6 years and one day of prision mayor as maximum. Petitioner appealed to the Court of Appeals contending that his intent to kill was not established, and that any person could have inflicted the wounds. The petitioner also insisted that he should only be guilty of slight physical injuries, not frustrated murder. Issues: (1) Whether or not the intent to kill, which is a critical element of the crime charged, is established in the case.

(2) Whether or not the petitioner is properly found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of frustrated homicide. Ruling: (1) YES. The wounds sustained by Alexander were not mere scuff-marks inflicted in the heat of anger or as the result of a fistfight between them. The petitioner wielded and used a knife in his assault on Alexander. There is also to be no doubt about the wound on Alexander’s chest being sufficient to result into his death were it not for the timely medical intervention.

(2) YES. With the State having thereby shown that the petitioner already performed all the acts of execution that should produce the felony of homicide as a consequence, but did not produce it by reason of causes independent of his will, i.e., the timely medical attention accorded to Alexander, he was properly found guilty of frustrated homicide.