Title
People vs. David
Case
G.R. No. 39708
Decision Date
Apr 16, 1934
Leovigildo David fired shots during a confrontation, injuring Jose V. Reyes and German Pinili. Convicted of frustrated homicide and discharge of firearms, David’s defense of his father was rejected. Penalties were reduced under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 39708)

Court Proceedings and Initial Sentencing

The trial court, after examining the evidence, found Leovigildo David guilty of frustrated murder (Criminal Case No. 3310) and discharge of firearms with less serious physical injuries (Criminal Case No. 3296). The court sentenced him to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal for the first charge, along with damages to the offended party totaling one thousand pesos, and two years, eleven months, and eleven days of prision correccional for the second charge.

Grounds for Appeal

David raised multiple errors in his appeal:

  1. The trial court's finding of guilt for frustrated murder.
  2. The guilty verdict for discharge of firearm resulting in less serious physical injuries.
  3. The acceptance of the prosecution's narrative over the defense's assertion of self-defense.
  4. Denial of acquittal based on the defenses provided.

Factual Background and Evidence

The events unfolded as follows: A confrontation arose between Teodoro David, Leovigildo's father, and Jose V. Reyes. During the altercation, while Jose was grappling with Teodoro, shots were fired by Leovigildo, eventually hitting Reyes in the back and German Pinili in the shoulder. The testimony of witnesses was crucial to establish the sequence of events and their implications on the charges.

Analysis of Intent and Execution

The crux of the case hinged on whether David intended to kill Reyes and the nature of the actions taken. Witness accounts were split regarding the positioning of Reyes when David shot. The court ultimately concluded that David did indeed have the intent to kill and did not act in defense as the aggression had ceased when he fired the shots.

Legal Framework for the Charges

The relevant provisions of the old Penal Code were applied to the charges:

  • Frustrated homicide is defined under Article 404, where the offender had performed all acts necessary to cause death but was unsuccessful due to external factors.
  • The legal implications of the charge against German Pinili were governed by Article 1, paragraph 3, which holds a perpetrator liable for unintended consequences arising from his direct actions.

Sentencing Guidelines

The sentencing for the crimes was detailed:

  • For frustrated homicide, the proper sentence was determined to be within the range of one year and one day to eight years, mitigating for immediate vindication of a grave offense.
  • For the discharge of firearms resulting in less serious injuries, the potential penalties

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.