Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. No. 5319, Feb 26, 1910 ]



15 Phil. 338

[ G. R. No. No. 5319, February 26, 1910 ]




It has  been clearly  proven that  the defendant  herein inflicted several wounds by  means of a lance on a  certain Wenceslao Agcaoili, some  of which required more than ninety days  to  heal.  Two  witnesses for  the  prosecution have asserted that  they saw the defendant in the act, and the latter admitted the fact on the stand.   The allegation made by the defendant that he attacked the injured party because he, with the assistance of the two witnesses for the prosecution above alluded to; was endeavoring to break open, by means of bolos, the door of his  mother-in-law's house, in which he was living, their intent being to kill him and afterwards to steal his carabaos, although corroborated by the testimony of his wife, was not "considered by the trial judge, and  he certainly  acted properly,  because the preponderance of evidence fully demonstrates that the injured man and the said witnesses were quietly conversing among  themselves  and  with  the mother-in-law  of the defendant, within the said house, at  the  time when the former was attacked and wounded by the  latter.   On the other hand, it is untrue that if  the final  purpose of the injured man was to steal  the carabaos, as the defendant has stated, he would have tried to break open the door of the house instead of the gate of the fence where the carabaos were  kept, thereby awakening the  owners and alarming the whole  neighborhood by blows struck  with the bolos upon  the  door of the  house, which would  have been the surest and readiest means  to prevent the carrying out of the intended robbery of the said animals.

The wounds of the  injured man were classified by the trial judge as lesiones menos graves, because, in the opinion of the physician who examined them, they could have been cured under proper medical attendance in  thirty to forty days.   As a matter of fact, however, the wounds required from three to four months  to heal.   The injured man says that he had no money with which to pay for the  services of a physician, and of course he was not to blame if, through lack of means, he was unable to secure  medical attendance. If for such reason the healing of the wounds required longer than if they had been properly treated,  the defendant must suffer the  consequences thereof, which in  reality  are no other than the consequences of his own act in inflicting the wounds; and  it does not appear, nor is there the least indication that the injured man did anything to retard or to prolong their healing.  He who executes  an act must respond for all  the consequences arising therefrom which can not be imputed to the fault of the injured party.  As the injuries above alluded to  required more than  ninety days to heal, the crime should be classified as graves, not menos graves  as erroneously concluded by the court below in the judgment appealed from,  and it falls  within paragraph  3 of article 416 of the Penal Code.

It appears from the evidence that the injured party was entirely unable to  take any precaution against the  aggression of which he was the victim and which resulted in the injuries in question.  He was  engaged in a friendly conversation with other persons  in the house of the defendant when he was suddenly attacked by the latter; not the least trouble,  dispute, row, or anything in fact from  which  an aggression might  have been feared or expected preceded the act.  It was,  owing  to  the  sudden character of the attack, a markedly treacherous act, which brings the present case within the provisions of  the last paragraph  of said article 416 which, in relation  with paragraph 3 of the same article,  imposes the penalty  of prision correccional in  its medium and maximum degrees.

The judgment appealed from is hereby reversed, and the defendant is sentenced to the  penalty  of  three  years six months and twenty-one days  of prision correccional, to pay the sum of P6 to Antonio Castro, president of the municipal board of health, for fees due him for the treatment of the wounds of the injured party,  to indemnify the latter in the sum of  P25, or  to suffer subsidiary imprisonment  in case of insolvency  at the rate of one  day's imprisonment for every twelve and a half pesetas that he fails  to pay, with one-half of the period of his detention to be  credited to him, and to pay the costs of this instance.  So ordered.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Johnson, Carson, and Moreland, JJ., concur.