People v. Dosal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Purificacion Dosal, about fifteen years old, reported to her brother, Leonardo Dosal (appellant), that she had been abused by her brother-in-law, Gregorio Gososo. Three days later, during a barrio fiesta, Gososo went to the house where Leonardo was staying. Leonardo confronted Gososo about the abuse, punching him when Gososo failed to explain. Later, Maxima Dacuno, their aunt, met Benito Fernandez, uncle of Gososo, who threatened to beat up Leonardo if he met him. Maxima warned Leonardo about Fernandez's threat and reputation as a cruel man. Leonardo informed his brother-in-law, Gabriel Dural, of the threat, stating he would stab Fernandez if attacked. Gabriel advised him to ignore it. Despite the warnings, Leonardo went to Bagacay, where Fernandez was. Upon meeting Fernandez, Leonardo suddenly drew a bolo and stabbed him in the left side, the blade penetrating his body. Fernandez turned and ran, and Leonardo chased and struck him again in the back, causing his death. Gregorio Mia, a rural policeman, witnessed Leonardo leaving the scene with the bloody bolo. Mia identified himself as an agent of authority and demanded Leonardo drop the weapon. Leonardo refused, stating he recognized no authority and was suicidal, then attacked Mia with the bolo, wounding him multiple times. Igmidio Apostol, another rural policeman, arrived and ordered Leonardo to drop the bolo. Leonardo thrust at Apostol, who retreated and struck Leonardo's hand, causing him to drop the bolo. Mia collapsed from blood loss, and Leonardo fled but later surrendered to the Constabulary. Procedural History: Leonardo Dosal was accused of frustrated homicide and murder in the Court of First Instance of Samar. He was found guilty in both cases and sentenced accordingly. He appealed the decision. The Petition: The defendant-appellant, Leonardo Dosal, appealed his conviction and sentences for frustrated homicide and murder.
Issue(s)
Whether the killing of Benito Fernandez was qualified by treachery and aggravated by evident premeditation. Whether the wounding of Gregorio Mia constituted assault upon an agent of a person in authority. Whether the penalty for frustrated homicide should be imposed in its maximum degree when aggravated by assault upon an agent of a person in authority. Whether the penalty next lower in degree to prision mayor in its maximum degree is prision mayor in its medium degree or prision correccional in its maximum degree.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court with modifications. The killing of Benito Fernandez was qualified as murder due to treachery and aggravated by evident premeditation, with the mitigating circumstance of surrender to authorities. The wounding of Gregorio Mia was classified as simple frustrated homicide, but the Court modified this to frustrated homicide with assault upon an agent of a person in authority, punishable by the maximum degree of prision mayor. The indemnity to the heirs of Benito Fernandez was increased to P6,000. The penalty for frustrated homicide was modified based on the indeterminate sentence law.
Ratio Decidendi
On the killing of Benito Fernandez: The Court found that the attack on Fernandez was sudden and without warning, thus qualifying the killing as murder due to treachery. Furthermore, evident premeditation was established because Dosal conceived the idea of attacking Fernandez on the morning of the incident, made preparations, and went in search of him with the bolo concealed, demonstrating a clear intent to kill. This aggravating circumstance was compensated by the mitigating circumstance of surrender to the authorities, as Dosal surrendered himself to the Constabulary thereafter. On the wounding of Gregorio Mia: The Court agreed with the Solicitor General that the wounding of Mia constituted assault upon an agent of a person in authority. Mia, a duly appointed rural policeman wearing a badge, identified himself as an agent of authority to Dosal. Dosal's response, stating he recognized no authority, indicated his awareness of Mia's status. The Court found the evidence conclusive and did not find it necessary to discuss the defense's story, particularly the claim of self-defense, noting the absence of the supposed weapon used by Fernandez. On the penalty for frustrated homicide with assault upon an agent of a person in authority: The Court modified the trial court's ruling on the crime committed against Mia from simple frustrated homicide to frustrated homicide with assault upon an agent of a person in authority. Consequently, the penalty should be imposed in its maximum degree, which is prision mayor in its maximum degree. On determining the penalty next lower in degree for the indeterminate sentence: The majority held that, following the doctrine in People vs. Gonzales, the penalty next lower in degree to prision mayor in its maximum degree is prision correccional in its maximum degree. Therefore, the indeterminate sentence for frustrated homicide should range from not less than four (4) years and nine (9) months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional to not more than ten (10) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of prision mayor.
Main Doctrine
The killing of Benito Fernandez was qualified by treachery and aggravated by evident premeditation, compensated by the mitigating circumstance of surrender to authorities. The wounding of Gregorio Mia constituted frustrated homicide with assault upon an agent of a person in authority, punishable by the maximum degree of the penalty for frustrated homicide.