Case Digest (G.R. No. 74433)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Francisco Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, September 14, 1987, Supreme Court Second Division, Sarmiento, J., writing for the Court.The People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee) prosecuted Francisco Abarca (accused-appellant) for the complex crime of murder with double frustrated murder. The amended information alleged that on July 15, 1984 in Tacloban City the accused, with deliberate intent to kill, evident premeditation and treachery, armed with an unlicensed M-16 rifle, shot several times at Khingsley Paul Koh causing his instantaneous death, and in the same attack inflicted gunshot wounds on Lina and Arnold Amparado that would have caused death but for timely medical aid.
At arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s evidence, summarized by the Solicitor General, established that Abarca discovered his wife Jenny and Koh in the act of sexual intercourse at their residence in the early evening. After leaving, the accused obtained an M-16 rifle from PC soldier Arturo Talbo and later confronted Koh at a mahjong session, firing several shots that killed Koh and wounded the Amparados, who occupied an adjacent room. Medical and expense evidence for the Amparados was introduced at trial.
On March 17, 1986 the Regional Trial Court of Palo, Leyte convicted Abarca of murder with double frustrated murder and imposed the death penalty, ordered indemnities, and—in light of the accused’s provocation—recommended executive clemency. The accused appealed; because a death sentence was originally imposed the case was elevated to the Supreme Court. After the 1987 Constitution abolished capital punishment and commuted death sentences, the Court required Abarca to state whether he wished to pursue the appeal; he elected to continue. The accused assigned errors including (1) that he s...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code apply to the killing, thereby affording the accused the benefit contemplated by that provision rather than liability for murder?
- Was the killing attended by the qualifying circumstance of treachery?
- Is the accused criminally liable for double frustrated murder for the injuries sustained by Arnold and Lina Amparado, or is another criminal cla...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)