Case Digest (G.R. No. 4774)
Facts:
The United States, Plaintiff and Appellee, vs. A. H. Barnes, Defendant and Appellant, G.R. No. 4774. November 18, 1908, the Supreme Court En Banc, Torres, J., writing for the Court. On 15 December 1906, at about 10:00 a.m., A. H. Barnes, accompanied by J. A. Ryan and three Filipinos including Pedro Leonardo, went duck shooting in the barrio of San Pablo, sitio of Muyot, municipality of San Antonio, Nueva Ecija. While returning, Barnes fired twice at ducks on an estero; on attempting to load a third cartridge the cartridge would not seat easily and he forced it into the automatic breech by pressing the gun against his knee. At that moment the gun discharged. Barnes was on his knees; when he rose he observed Leonardo sinking in the water. The men recovered Leonardo’s body; a surgeon found a gunshot wound in the back of the head with broken bones, a mortal wound.The provincial fiscal filed a complaint against Barnes on 27 March 1907, charging him with reckless negligence (homicide through imprudence). At trial the judge convicted Barnes and imposed six months of arresto mayor, ordered payment of P300 indemnity to the heirs (with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency), costs, and gave credit for preventive detention. Barnes appealed the conviction to the Supreme Court. The Court reviewed the record, considered the character of the discharge (an automatic gun licensed to Barnes that went off while he was forcing a cartridge), and resolved whether the act was volun...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the discharge of Barnes’s gun a voluntary act subjecting him to criminal liability under the presumption of voluntariness in Article 1 of the Penal Code?
- Did the proven facts constitute the crime of homicide through imprudence (reckless negligence) under Article 568,...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)