Case Summary (G.R. No. 75256)
Preliminary Investigation and Information Filed
Following the fatal accident, the examining fiscal initially exonerated Guevarra due to his age and the apparent accidental nature of the shooting. The victim’s parents appealed to the Ministry of Justice, which directed the fiscal to file homicide through reckless imprudence charges. An information was lodged on 9 October 1985 alleging that the accused, “over 9 years but below 15 years of age and acting with discernment,” recklessly fired a .22-caliber air rifle, causing death.
Motion to Quash and Lower Court Ruling
On 25 October 1985, petitioner moved to quash the information on grounds that: (1) the facts did not constitute an offense; (2) the information alleged a legal excuse or justification; and (3) the court lacked jurisdiction over both offense and person. By order of 4 April 1986, the trial court denied the motion as to the first and third grounds, deferring resolution of the second until trial.
Issues Presented in the Petition for Certiorari
On 26 July 1986, Guevarra filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court raising two issues:
- Whether an 11-year-old boy may be charged with homicide through reckless imprudence.
- Whether the court had jurisdiction despite bypassing compulsory barangay conciliation.
Distinction between “Discernment” and “Intent”
Petitioner argued that “discernment” under Article 12(3) of the Revised Penal Code equates to criminal intent, rendering the information self-contradictory for alleging both discernment and culpable negligence. The Solicitor General and the Court disagreed, distinguishing “intent” as the mental determination to bring about a result from “discernment,” which denotes a minor’s capacity to understand right from wrong. Case law (People v. Doquena, 1939) defines discernment as moral comprehension, whereas intent is an active purpose to commit a wrongful act.
Criminal Capacity of Minors under the Revised Penal Code
Article 12 exempts children under nine from criminal liability. Those over nine and under fifteen are presumed incapable but this presumption may be rebutted upon proof of discernment. Liability for offenses committed by recklessness (culpa) requires proof of intelligence (including discernment), freedom of action, and negligence—intent being inapplicable. Thus, a minor aged 9–15 may incur criminal liability for quasi-offenses such as homicide by reckless imprudence (Art. 365, RPC).
Jurisdictional Requirement under Presidential Decree No. 1508
Petitioner co
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 75256)
Facts
- Petitioner John Philip Guevarra, aged 11, was playing target‐shooting with an air rifle in the backyard with four children on 29 October 1984.
- They shot at a bottle cap placed 15–20 meters away; Teodoro Almine, Jr. was accidentally hit on the left collarbone by a pellet and died.
- The examining fiscal initially exculpated the petitioner due to his age and the apparent accidental nature of the incident.
- The victim’s parents appealed; the Ministry of Justice ordered the filing of homicide by reckless imprudence charges.
- Information filed on 9 October 1985 charged the petitioner, “over 9 years but below 15 years of age and acting with discernment,” with homicide through reckless imprudence for willfully firing the air rifle.
Procedural History
- 25 October 1985: Petitioner moved to quash the information on three grounds: (I) facts do not constitute an offense; (II) the information contains averments amounting to legal excuse or justification; (III) lack of jurisdiction over offense and person.
- 4 April 1986: Motion to quash denied as to grounds I and III; resolution on ground II deferred until trial.
- 17 September 1986: People of the Philippines impleaded as respondents.
- 26 July 1986: Petition for certiorari filed, raising two issues:
• Whether an 11-year-old can be charged with homicide through reckless imprudence.
• Whether the trial court had jurisdiction despite bypassing the Barangay conciliation (P.D. 1508).
Issues Presented
- Issue 1: Can a minor aged over 9 but under 15 be held criminally liable for h