G.R. No. 5649 - People vs. Samonte

The accused, Isaac Samonte, was charged with criminal attempt against an agent of the authorities.
He was tried in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Tayabas and subsequently sentenced to one year, eight months, and twenty-one days of prision correccional, a fine of P65 (with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency), accessory penalties under Article 61 of the Penal Code, and payment of costs.
Samonte appealed the conviction, challenging both the facts presented and the legal basis of the arrest.

On the night of September 6, 1908, around 8 o’clock, Samonte and Basilio Rabe were at the house of Demetrio Pandenio in the barrio of Macalalong, Pitogo, Province of Tayabas.
After leaving the house, the two met in the street (Verdades) in the said barrio and became engaged in a quarrel.
During the quarrel, the appellant physically assaulted Basilio Rabe by knocking or pushing him down and then proceeded to maltreat him.

Upon hearing Rabe’s cry for help—“police! police!”—Gregorio Glindo, a municipal policeman on patrol duty, arrived at the scene.
Glindo arrived just as Rabe was getting up and attempted to arrest Samonte while giving the command: “In the name of the United States, don’t move.”
Samonte, reacting to the policeman’s approach, warned him not to come near by stating, “Don’t come near, because I will take your life.”
In response, as the policeman continued to approach, Samonte struck him with a knife in an attempt to resist the arrest.

Due to his resistance, the policeman could not successfully arrest Samonte at that time.
Glindo proceeded immediately to Demetrio Pandenio’s house to report the incident.
Acting on Pandenio’s command, the policeman and the councilman went to find the appellant in a place called Mutingbayan.
A renewed attempt to arrest Samonte was met with continued resistance as he again struck the policeman with his knife.
When ordered to submit by the councilman, Samonte retorted, “I do not recognize anyone,” and struck the councilman with his knife.
Despite the physical altercations and refusal to submit, the appellant did not cause any actual physical injury (i.e., he did not wound or successfully touch the policeman or the councilman).

The ruling emphasized that any police officer charged with preserving public peace could arrest, without a warrant, any person committing, or having committed, a breach of the peace in his presence.
It was noted that the officer’s authority derived from established jurisprudence which permits warrantless arrest when the offense is committed in the officer’s view, at a distance where the officer hears disturbances, or when the offense is in progress or not consummated.

The appellant’s counsel argued that the prosecution failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the policeman, Gregorio Glindo, attempted to arrest him at Verdades Street, which was reported as the scene of the incident.
It was contended that if the arrest occurred in that location, without a judicial warrant, the policeman was not authorized to effect an arrest.

Whether the appellant’s actions, specifically his use of a knife against the police officer and the councilman while resisting arrest, constituted a valid ground for criminal attempt under the law.
Whether the absence of actual physical contact (i.e., the accused did not injure the policeman or councilman) affected his criminal liability for the attempt.

The legal issue of whether an officer may arrest a person without a warrant when the offense—breach of the peace—has been witnessed or heard, even if not consummated.
Whether the duty to arrest under public peace preservation was properly executed given the circumstances of the altercation.