People v. Maquilan
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On May 1, 1905, municipal policemen Leoncio Robles and Gregorio Villanueva were patrolling when they observed Santiago Maquilan and Tiburcio Delgado fighting with sticks. They intervened to separate the combatants and ordered them to accompany them to the barrio representative. Tiburcio Delgado complied, but Santiago Maquilan refused and sat on the ground. As the policemen attempted to escort Maquilan, his brother Jose appeared and confronted Tiburcio Delgado. Policeman Villanueva released Santiago Maquilan to attend to the confrontation between Jose and Tiburcio. Seizing the opportunity, Santiago Maquilan attacked Policeman Leoncio Robles with a penknife, wounding him in the left side, and then fled and locked himself in his house. Procedural History: A complaint was filed by the provincial fiscal charging Santiago Maquilan with attempt against an agent of the authorities. The Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros rendered a judgment on December 1, 1906, sentencing the accused to two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional, a fine of 625 pesetas, and subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, plus costs. The Appeal: The accused, through his counsel, appealed the judgment of the Court of First Instance to the Supreme Court, challenging the conviction and sentence.
Issue(s)
Whether the accused is guilty of the crime of attempt against an agent of the authorities. Whether the mitigating circumstance of loss of reason and self-control is applicable. Whether the petition for a new trial is admissible.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, sentencing Santiago Maquilan to two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional, with a fine of 625 pesetas, and subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, plus costs. The Court found the accused guilty of attempt against an agent of the authorities and applied the mitigating circumstance of loss of reason and self-control.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: Whether the accused is guilty of the crime of attempt against an agent of the authorities. The Supreme Court held that the facts proven established the commission of the crime of attempt against an agent of the authorities. It was undisputed that the policemen, Leoncio Robles and Gregorio Villanueva, were on patrol and performing their duties when they intervened in a fight between the accused and Tiburcio Delgado. When the accused resisted apprehension and attempted to escape, he attacked Policeman Robles with a penknife, a pointed weapon, thereby committing an act that constitutes an attempt against an agent of the authorities. The Court found the testimony of the injured policeman, the other policeman, and the eyewitness Tiburcio Delgado to be sufficient proof of the charge, despite the accused's denial and exculpatory allegations. The Court also noted that the accused himself acknowledged the individuals who separated him and Delgado were policemen. On Issue 2: Whether the mitigating circumstance of loss of reason and self-control is applicable. The Supreme Court considered the mitigating circumstance No. 7 of Article 9 of the Penal Code applicable. The Court reasoned that the aggression occurred while the accused was engaged in a fight with Tiburcio Delgado and had just received a blow which wounded him. This situation likely produced in him a loss of reason and self-control, thereby mitigating his culpability. The Court found no aggravating circumstances to offset this mitigating factor. On Issue 3: Whether the petition for a new trial is admissible. The Supreme Court ruled that the petition for a new trial was not admissible. The evidence intended to be adduced, which consisted of sworn statements to obtain the withdrawal of two prosecution witnesses who were not cross-examined, was not considered new or discovered only after the trial. The Court viewed this as an attempt to obtain counter-proof after the proceedings were closed, which is contrary to law. Furthermore, the Court stated that even if the witnesses were withdrawn, the record already contained sufficient evidence of the crime and the accused's responsibility.
Main Doctrine
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Santiago Maquilan for the crime of attempt against an agent of the authorities. The Court held that the accused attacked a policeman with a penknife while the officer was performing his duty of apprehending the accused for engaging in a fight. The Court also recognized the mitigating circumstance of having acted with loss of reason and self-control due to the immediate circumstances of the aggression, as provided for in Article 9, No. 7 of the Penal Code, and applied it in sentencing.