Title
Lacanilao vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. L-34940
Decision Date
Jun 27, 1988
A policeman convicted of homicide for overstepping duty was granted a penalty reduction under Article 69 of the Revised Penal Code, recognizing incomplete justification as a special mitigating circumstance.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-34940)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

The petitioner, a policeman, was initially convicted by the Court of First Instance of Manila for homicide in connection with the death of Ceferino Erese. While he had acted in response to a call of duty—attempting to stop the victim and his companions from engaging in drunken, disorderly conduct—he exceeded the bounds of his duty by shooting and killing the victim. Although his actions were taken while performing a duty, the fatal shooting was not the necessary consequence of a proper or due performance of that duty. On appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the sentence by reducing the imposed penalty, citing the mitigating circumstance of the incomplete justification (or incomplete fulfillment of duty), which, under the court’s view, warranted a lowering of the penalty by one period.

Issues:

The sole issue was whether, when the accused is found to have incompletely fulfilled the requirements for justification or the lawful exercise of a right, does Article 69 of the Revised Penal Code apply—thereby entitling the accused to a reduction in the penalty by one or two degrees.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.