Case Digest (G.R. No. 33463)
Facts:
The case of The People of the Philippine Islands vs. Basilio Borinaga revolves around an incident that occurred on March 4, 1929, in the municipality of Calubian, Leyte. The defendant, Basilio Borinaga, was associated with Juan Lawaan, who had a contract with Harry H. Mooney, an American resident, for the construction of a fish corral. On the morning in question, Lawaan, accompanied by his workers, attempted to collect the full payment from Mooney despite only two-thirds of the construction being completed. Mooney refused to pay, prompting Lawaan to threaten him. After breakfast, Mooney sat in a neighbor's shop owned by Perpetua Najarro. Here, Borinaga attacked him with a knife, striking the back of a chair and narrowly missing Mooney. Witnesses reported Borinaga had declared his intent to harm Mooney by calling him an "American brute." After the unsuccessful initial attack, Borinaga retreated but returned shortly after with the intent to attack again; however, he
...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 33463)
Facts:
- Background and Parties Involved
- The case involves an American, Harry H. Mooney, a resident of Calubian, Leyte, and a local contractor, Juan Lawaan, with whom Mooney contracted for the construction of a fish corral.
- Basilio Borinaga, the defendant-appellant, was associated with Lawaan in the construction of the corral.
- Events Leading to the Incident
- Prior to March 4, 1929, Lawaan and Borinaga were engaged in constructing the fish corral for Mooney.
- On the morning of March 4, 1929, Lawaan visited Mooney’s shop to collect the entire contract price, despite the fact that only about two-thirds of the corral was completed.
- Mooney refused to pay the full amount at that time, triggering Lawaan to threaten him by warning that “something would happen” if payment was not rendered.
- Mooney’s calm retort, suggesting any harm be postponed until after breakfast, preceded Lawaan’s departure with his men.
- The Violent Encounter
- Later on March 4, 1929, in the evening, Mooney was at the store of his neighbor, Perpetua Najarro.
- Mooney was seated on a chair in front of Perpetua with his back toward the window.
- While inside, Perpetua observed Borinaga approaching the shop.
- Borinaga struck at Mooney with a knife; however, the knife lodged in the back of the chair rather than inflicting any injury on Mooney.
- The force of the blow caused Mooney to fall from the chair, though he was not injured.
- Borinaga fled toward the marketplace immediately following the blow.
- Prior to the attack, Borinaga was heard remarking to a companion, “I will stab this. Mooney, who is an American brute,” indicating his murderous intent.
- Post-altercation, Borinaga also stated that he had not hit Mooney but merely struck the chair.
- Borinaga returned approximately ten minutes later with a knife to renew his attempt, but was deterred by the sudden use of a flashlight by Mooney and Perpetua, which frightened him away.
- He was subsequently overheard claiming that he had missed his mark owing to the interference of the flashlight.
- Later examination revealed that the knife’s point was embedded in the chair, having become a silent witness to the events.
- Prosecution and Trial Proceedings
- These events led to Basilio Borinaga’s prosecution in the Court of First Instance of Leyte for the crime of frustrated murder.
- The defense advanced an alibi which was not accepted by the court.
- Judge Ortiz convicted Borinaga, sentencing him to fourteen years, eight months, and one day of imprisonment (rclusion temporal), along with accessory penalties and the costs.
- The conviction was based on evidence showing a deliberate homicidal intent and an overt act using a deadly weapon executed with treachery.
Issues:
- Crime Classification
- Whether the facts established amounted to frustrated murder or merely an attempt to commit murder under Article 3 of the Penal Code.
- Clarification of whether Borinaga performed all the acts of execution necessary for consummating the crime of murder.
- Legal Definitions Under the Penal Code
- The essential difference between a frustrated felony and an attempt:
- Frustrated felony requires that all acts of execution were performed but the crime was not consummated due to causes independent of the perpetrator’s will.
- An attempt occurs when the offender commences the commission through overt acts but does not perform all execution acts, owing to factors other than voluntary desistance.
- The debate centered on whether the obstruction by the chair (preventing the knife from reaching Mooney’s vital parts) constituted an external cause rendering the act frustrated or simply incomplete.
- Contrasting Judicial Opinions
- The majority opinion held that the acts committed amounted to frustrated murder despite Mooney sustaining no injury.
- The dissenting justices argued that the absence of a deadly wound and the actual failure to inflict the fatal injury relegated the crime to an attempted murder.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)