Title
Justo vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. L-8611
Decision Date
Jun 28, 1956
Petitioner assaulted a public official during a dispute over a teaching position; courts upheld conviction, ruling aggression against a person in authority unlawful regardless of mutual challenge.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 158589)

Background of the Incident

Nemesio B. de la Cuesta was in the office to revise the plantilla of his district. As he was leaving the office for lunch, he encountered Severino P. Justo discussing staffing with another academic supervisor, Severino Caridad. Justo inquired about hiring a teacher, Miss Racela, and, upon learning there were no vacancies, accused De la Cuesta of being a "double-crosser" and challenged him physically by seizing a paperweight and confronting him.

Events Leading to the Assault

The escalation of the conflict is marked by Justo’s aggressive behavior, culminating in him grabbing De la Cuesta’s shirt collar, leading to physical altercation despite intervention by Carlos Bueno, a clerk present at the scene. De la Cuesta attempted to assert his authority by asking Justo to put down the paperweight but instead found himself physically attacked.

Legal Arguments

In the appeal, the petitioner argued that De la Cuesta’s acceptance of Justo's challenge to fight indicated he was no longer acting as a person in authority and therefore could not claim to be unlawfully attacked. Moreover, the petitioner contended that there was no unlawful aggression on his part due to what he argued was a mutual agreement to fight.

Court's Reasoning

The Court of Appeals rejected these arguments, asserting that the status of a person in authority does not diminish merely due to an engagement in a verbal altercation or challenge to a fight. The Court emphasized that De la Cuesta was still performing his official duties, which the appellant targeted when he assaulted him. Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code is fundamental here, as it punishes assaults on persons in authority "while engaged in the performance of official duties or on occasion of such performance," thus recognizing the duty irrespective of the exact moment of the attack.

Legal Precedents

The Court referenced previous rulings, highlighting that any attack stemming from or related to a person in authority’s official duties remains actionable, reinforcing the principle that public officials must operate without

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.