Case Summary (G.R. No. 42476)
Case Decision and Charges
The Court of First Instance of Davao convicted the defendants of frustrated homicide, citing an aggravating circumstance of superior strength. Each defendant received an indeterminate sentence ranging from six years of prision correccional to twelve years of prision mayor, along with a joint indemnity payment to Angel Pulido amounting to P540 and cost liabilities. The defendants appealed, contending that the trial court erred in their conviction.
Participation of Defendants
The evidence presented indicated that Autor, Ladion, and Cortesano were working under the supervision of Omine when the incident occurred. The prior request by Omine to create a new road through Pulido's plantation led to a confrontation resulting in conflict. The prosecution's witnesses claimed the defendants attacked Pulido, while the defense argued that Pulido and his son were the initiators of aggression.
Contradictory Testimonies
The testimony provided by witnesses, including the offended party and his son, was contradicted by the accounts of the defendants. It was noted that only one blow was inflicted by Eduardo Autor on Angel Pulido, questioning the extent of the participation and conspiracy among the defendants. The trial court found circumstances that resulted in convictions for all, but the appellate court scrutinized the level of involvement of individuals, particularly Ladion and Cortesano.
Inducement and Culpability
The Court analyzed whether Omine could be liable by inducing Autor to strike Pulido. The court referenced the principle of direct inducement, emphasizing that mere verbal encouragement must significantly influence the act committed for liability to exist. Given the circumstances, any words uttered by Omine did not provide sufficient grounds for establishing his culpability.
Evaluation of Intent
The court also evaluated the intention behind Autor's actions. Although the wound inflicted was serious, it was argued that it was not a precise act meant to kill and was likely a consequence of a commotion rather than a calculated attempt. Prior judg
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 42476)
Case Background
- The case involves an appeal by the defendants from a decision rendered by the Court of First Instance of Davao.
- The defendants were found guilty of frustrated homicide, with the aggravating circumstance of having taken advantage of their superior strength.
- They were sentenced to an indeterminate prison term ranging from six years of prision correccional to twelve years of prision mayor.
- The defendants were also ordered to indemnify the offended party, Angel Pulido, the sum of P540, and to pay the costs without subsidiary imprisonment if found insolvent.
Issues Raised
- The primary issue contested by the defendants is the lower court's conviction and the failure to acquit them with costs de oficio.
- A critical point of consideration is the level of participation of each defendant in the alleged crime.
Events Leading to the Incident
- The defendants, Eduardo Autor, Luis Ladion, Agapito Cortesano, and Kiichi Omine, worked on Angel Pulido's hemp plantation, with Omine serving as the overseer.
- Kiichi Omine requested permission to open a new road through the plantation, which Angel Pulido refused, citing an existing unfinished road.
- Despite the refusal, Omine claimed he received permission and began to clear the area on December 24, 1933.
- Upon returning from an outing, Angel Pulido and his companions discovered that a significant number of hemp plants had been destroyed.
The Confrontation
- Angered, Angel Pulido and his group confronted the defendants at their residence after the defendants had finished supper.
- A stark conflict arose regarding the sequence of events during the