G.R. No. 201536 - Grace Marine Shipping Corp. vs. Alarcon

Case Summary (G.R. No. 201536)

Factual Background

The stabbing occurred at about 8:30 a.m. on November 23, 1932, while Raymundo Calderon was inside the municipal building of Aliaga. As Calderon was going down the stairway, the appellant, armed with a knife (identified as Exhibit A), stabbed him on the back. The attack was sudden and unexpected. There was no exchange of words between the appellant and the offended party. As a consequence of the stabbing, Raymundo Calderon collapsed and rolled down from the first step to the last step of the stairway. Police personnel, including corporal Meliton Facundo, brought Calderon to the dispensary.

Raymundo Calderon felt weak and dizzy due to the wound. He was treated by Dr. Marcelo Medina, though he did not know precisely what the doctor did. He reported that he vomited the food he had taken at breakfast and spit blood. The medical findings described the wound as more than one-half inch in length and less than two inches in depth, with the right lung affected. The right lung implication was linked to the vomiting of blood after the wound was partially sutured. On the same date, Calderon was taken to the Cabanatuan Hospital and remained there until December 8, 1932. During that period, he could not stand up, could not lie sideways, and exhibited severe weakness, fever, and difficulty in breathing. On December 8, 1932, Dr. Restituto Yuson found effusion in the pleural cavity and determined that the wound between the scapula and the spine caused the effusion. Dr. Yuson assessed the condition as serious and decided to bring the patient to Manila by train.

On December 9, 1932, Calderon was taken to Saint Paul’s Hospital in Manila. After taking a radiograph of the wound, the attending physician decided to operate immediately and took from the pleural cavity a bloody serum. Calderon stayed at Saint Paul’s Hospital from December 9 to December 24, 1932. By the time he left, the wound was healed, but he remained weak. Although no further treatment was necessary, the doctor advised him not to work. Calderon resumed work only on February 1, 1933, as chief of police of Aliaga, with a monthly salary of P40, which he failed to earn from November 23, 1932 to February 1, 1933. He also spent P800 for the treatment of his wound.

Procedural History

After arraignment, the appellant entered a plea of not guilty. At trial, he waived his right to present evidence. The lower court relied on the prosecution evidence to determine the established facts and found the appellant guilty of the crime charged. The record also reflected that on November 23, 1932, the appellant made a sworn statement before the justice of the peace of Aliaga, marked as Exhibit B, and that he waived his right to present evidence in his behalf. The Court of First Instance sentenced the appellant to suffer twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal and required him to indemnify Raymundo Calderon in the amount of P890.64.

On appeal, the appellant submitted a single assignment of error. He argued that the trial court erred in convicting him of frustrated murder, insisting that the evidence supported only a conviction for serious physical injuries under the first paragraph of subdivision 4, article 263 of the Revised Penal Code, together with the claimed mitigating circumstance under subdivision 7, article 13 of the same Code.

The Parties’ Contentions

The appellant centered his contention on the absence of sufficient proof of intention to kill. He maintained that, in the absence of any express declaration of such intent, the intention must be inferred from the evidence like any other fact, and he argued that the inference was not established with the required degree of certainty. On this premise, the appellant urged that the offense should be reduced from frustrated murder to serious physical injuries.

The trial court had already rejected the defense. It framed the question as whether the act constituted the crime charged in the information or merely serious physical injuries. It relied on circumstances surrounding the motive and the manner of the stabbing to infer an intention to kill, and it also found that treachery qualified the offense because the appellant stabbed from behind, catching Calderon unaware.

Trial Court Findings and Basis for Frustrated Murder

The lower court found that the appellant stabbed Raymundo Calderon on the back from behind with a knife. It emphasized that the aggression was unexpected and that Calderon collapsed and rolled down the stairway. In the lower court’s view, motive supported an inference of lethal intent. It noted that the appellant believed that Calderon had won over the love and affection of Pastora Acebron, the concubine of the appellant, to the extent that the appellant believed she had already become Calderon’s concubine. On that understanding, the lower court concluded that when the appellant stabbed Calderon from behind, the appellant was determined to “do away with” the latter.

The lower court further held that the wound itself warranted the inference of intention to kill. It reasoned that the appellant performed all acts of execution that would have deprived Calderon of life but that death did not occur by reason of causes independent of the appellant’s will, specifically the timely medical attendance rendered to the offended party. It also found treachery present due to the manner of attack: stabbing from behind while the offended party was caught unaware, employing means and methods that tended directly and especially to insure execution without risk to the appellant arising from any defense Calderon might have made.

Although the lower court observed that the collapse and rolling down of Calderon could have produced in the appellant the impression that Calderon had been killed or at least inflicted a mortal wound, it held that, in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary, the circumstances still supported the conclusion that the appellant intended to inflict a mortal wound.

Appellate Issue: Whether Intent to Kill Was Proven

On appeal, the Court treated the only question as whether the evidence made out a case of frustrated murder. Since frustrated murder requires the performance of acts of execution with intent to kill, the appellate controversy focused on whether the evidence sufficiently established that intention to kill existed, despite the absence of an express statement by the appellant.

Appellate Ruling and Reasoning

The Court affirmed the conviction. It held that the lower court was warranted in inferring from the facts that the appellant intended to inflict a mortal wound on Raymundo Calderon. The Court recognized that intention to kill, in the absence of formal or express declaration, must be inferred from the evidence.

The Court explained that intention to kill may be reasonably inferred from multiple relevant facts, including the motive and circumstances of the attack. It treated the motive as important, namely the appellant’s desire to keep Pastora Acebron for himself rather than to “Jose” her to Raymundo Calderon. It also considered the use of a deadly weapon, the stabbing in a vital spot that the appellant might reasonably have supposed would be mortal, and the treacherous manner of a

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 201536)

Parties and Procedural Posture

The case involved The People of the Philippine Islands as Plaintiff and Appellee and Lorenzo de la Cruz as Defendant and Appellant.
The appeal challenged a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija convicting the accused of frustrated murder.
The accused pleaded not guilty upon arraignment.
At trial, the accused waived the right to present evidence in his behalf.
The issue on appeal was framed as whether the evidence proved frustrated murder rather than a lesser offense.
The appellate court affirmed the conviction with costs against the appellant.

Key Factual Allegations

The information alleged that on or about November 23, 1932, in Aliaga, Nueva Ecija, the accused stabbed Raymundo Calderon, then chief of police, with a knife.
The information alleged treachery and evident premeditation, and that the stabbing was committed with intent to kill.
The information stated that the accused performed the acts of execution that would have produced the death of Calderon but that death did not occur due to causes independent of the will of the accused, specifically timely medical attendance.
The information described the medical consequence as a serious wound that required attendance for more than thirty days but less than ninety days and incapacitated Calderon for a like period.
The defense theory, as argued by the accused, was that the facts supported serious physical injuries rather than attempted deprivation of life.

Trial Court’s Findings

The trial court found that at 8:30 a.m. of November 23, 1932, while Calderon was in the municipal building and going down the stairway, the accused stabbed him on the back.
The trial court found that Calderon collapsed and rolled down from the first step to the last of the stairway.
The trial court treated the aggression as unexpected, citing the absence of any exchange of words.
Calderon was brought to the dispensary by police corporal Meliton Facundo.
The trial court found that Calderon felt weak and dizzy and reported symptoms including vomiting and spitting blood.
The trial court recorded that Dr. Marcelo Medina found a wound described as more than one-half inch in length and less than two inches in depth.
The trial court found that the right lung was affected, and that vomiting blood followed partial suturing.
The trial court found that Calderon was taken to the Cabanatuan Hospital on the same date and stayed there until December 8, 1932.
The trial court described Calderon’s condition at Cabanatuan as extreme weakness with fever and difficulty in breathing, and an inability to stand up or lie sideways.
The trial court found that Dr. Restituto Yuson examined Calderon on December 8, 1932 and found effusion in the pleural cavity in a serious condition.
The trial court found that the wound in the upper thorax between the scapula and the spine caused the effusion and that Calderon could not stand, prompting transfer to Manila.
The trial court found that on December 9, 1932, Calderon was taken to Saint Paul’s Hospital and that after a radiograph, the surgeon operated immediately.
The trial court found that the pleural cavity contained bloody serum and that Calderon remained at Saint Paul’s Hospital from December 9 to December 24, 1932.
The trial court found that when Calderon left the hospital the wound was healed, though he remained weak and was advised not to work.
The trial court found that Calderon resumed his work as chief of police only on February 1, 1933, losing salary from November 23, 1932 to that date.
The trial court found that Calderon spent P800 for treatment of the wound.
The trial court noted that on November 23, 1932, the accused made a sworn statement before the justice of the peace, marked Exhibit B.
The trial court imposed a penalty of twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal and ordered indemnity to Calderon of P890.64.

Assignment of Error and Issue

The appellant assigned as error the conviction for frustrated murder, asserting that the proper conviction was serious physical injuries under article 263, first paragraph, subdivision 4 of the Revised Penal Code with the mitigating circumstance under subdivisi