Title
People vs. Umaguing
Case
G.R. No. L-52797
Decision Date
Aug 31, 1981
A hospital janitor removed a patient's endotracheal tube, hastening her decline. Convicted of attempted murder, not consummated, due to pre-existing fatal condition.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-52797)

Facts of the Case

On January 8, 1977, Amparo Lazo y Villaflor, a 76-year-old woman, suffered a stroke that left her in a coma and requiring immediate medical attention. She was rushed to the Polymedic General Hospital where she was admitted in critical condition. Doctors attempted to stabilize her using various medical procedures, including the insertion of an endotracheal tube. Despite this, Angelo Umaguing, a janitor at the hospital, unlawfully removed the tube after the doctors had left, resulting in severe complications for the patient.

Incident and Medical Response

Umaguing's actions, witnessed by several individuals, caused Lazo to convulse and bleed from the mouth. Medical personnel were alerted, and the tube was reinserted, but Lazo’s condition remained grave, prompting her transfer to Cardinal Santos Memorial Hospital, where she subsequently died from cardiorespiratory arrest the following day.

Legal Proceedings

Following Lazo’s death, the Mandaluyong police initiated an investigation which led to the filing of murder charges against Umaguing. The Circuit Criminal Court convicted him of consummated murder with several aggravating circumstances, ultimately imposing the death penalty, which was then elevated for review.

Defense Claims and Court Findings

During the trial, Umaguing testified that he was instructed by Dr. Sison to remove the tube, a claim denied by Dr. Sison. His defense hinged on claims that the critical nature of the victim’s condition meant her death was inevitable, thus negating intent. However, the court found that Umaguing had no lawful reason to be at the emergency room during the procedure and acted with malicious intent when he removed the tube, which constituted an attempt on the victim's life.

Court’s Conclusion on Intent and Legal Outcome

The court determined that Umaguing's conduct was not accidental but purposeful, indicating a malignant intention. The trial court’s original findings were modified to reflect that while the defendant’s actions constituted att

...continue reading

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