People v. Maghirang
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The accused, Roman Maghirang, Damaso Rivera, and Francisco Gutierrez, along with Pablo Sahagun, went to the house of Cornelio Briones for a serenade. Briones requested them to stop due to his sister-in-law's illness. The following day, while Briones was crossing a dry run on his carabao, the accused ambushed him. Gutierrez seized the carabao, Rivera struck Briones with a club, knocking him down. Maghirang then struck Briones twice with a bolo, once on the shoulder and once across the lips, rendering him senseless. The accused then withdrew. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Laguna convicted the accused of frustrated murder and sentenced each to eight years and one day of prision mayor, with accessories, to pay P400 jointly and severally to the offended party, and to pay costs. The Petition: The accused appealed the judgment of conviction.
Issue(s)
Whether the crime committed was frustrated murder or lesiones graves. Whether the aggravating circumstances of treachery, premeditation, despoblado, and superior force were present.
Ruling
The judgment of conviction for frustrated murder was reversed. The accused were convicted of lesiones graves with the aggravating circumstances of treachery, premeditation, despoblado, and superior force, and sentenced to six years eight months and twenty-one days of prision mayor, with accessories, to indemnify the offended party in the sum of P400 jointly and severally, and to pay costs.
Ratio Decidendi
On the classification of the crime: The Court held that the crime committed was lesiones graves and not frustrated murder. According to Article 3 of the Penal Code, a felony is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which should produce the felony as a consequence, but which do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. In this case, the accused did not perform all the acts of execution that would produce death. The wounds inflicted were not located in a vital spot, nor were they mortal or likely to produce death. The accused did not continue the assault to effectuate death, nor did they use the bolo for the first blow, despite having the opportunity and no one preventing them. The Court distinguished this from cases of frustrated murder where the wound inflicted should have produced death and was only saved by causes independent of the perpetrator's will, citing U.S. vs. Lim San. The Court also clarified that it was not attempted murder because the accused voluntarily desisted from further injuring the victim, which is a cause other than their own voluntary desistance that would prevent the consummation of the felony. On the presence of aggravating circumstances: The Court found the aggravating circumstances of alevosia (treachery), premeditation, despoblado (taking advantage of uninhabited place), and superior force to be present. Treachery was evident because Briones was attacked from behind and suddenly, without an opportunity to offer resistance. The ambush from the bushes and the seizure of the carabao by one accused while another struck Briones with a club, followed by Maghirang's bolo blows, demonstrated the use of superior force and possibly despoblado as they attacked him in a secluded area. The prior incident the night before, which allegedly motivated the attack, could be considered as evidence of premeditation, although the primary focus was on the manner of the attack itself. The Court stated that these aggravating circumstances necessitated the imposition of the penalty in its maximum degree.
Main Doctrine
The crime committed was lesiones graves (serious injuries) with the aggravating circumstance of treachery, not frustrated murder, because the accused did not perform all the acts of execution which should produce death, as the wounds inflicted were not mortal nor located in a vital spot, and the accused voluntarily desisted from further assault.