Title
Urbano vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 182750
Decision Date
Jan 20, 2009
A heated altercation led to a fatal punch; Urbano convicted of homicide, penalty reduced due to mitigating circumstances—provocation and lack of intent to kill.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 160341)

Facts of the Case

The facts established through the prosecution's evidence indicate that on the evening of September 28, 1993, Urbano and Tomelden, after consuming alcohol, had a heated exchange inside the compound of the Lingayen Water District. A fistfight ensued after Tomelden insulted Urbano, which culminated in Urbano delivering a punch that knocked Tomelden unconscious. Tomelden was subsequently taken to the LIWAD office and later to the hospital due to severe headaches and other complications. His condition deteriorated, and he died on October 10, 1993, from cardio-respiratory arrest secondary to cerebral concussion and resultant cerebral hemorrhage.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

On April 30, 2001, the RTC found Urbano guilty of homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. The court sentenced him to an indeterminate prison term of eight years and one day to seventeen years and four months and ordered him to pay the heirs of the victim PHP 50,000 in civil indemnity.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA)

The CA affirmed the RTC's decision on January 25, 2008, while modifying the ruling to include an award of moral damages amounting to PHP 50,000. The CA maintained that the evidence established that Urbano's actions were the proximate cause of Tomleden's death.

Issues on Appeal

Urbano raised two primary issues before the Supreme Court: (I) the CA erred in affirming his conviction for homicide; and (II) the court failed to recognize mitigating circumstances, including lack of intent to kill and sufficient provocation by Tomleden.

The Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court ruled in part favor of Urbano, acknowledging that the prosecution had indeed proven the elements of homicide. However, the Court found merit in Urbano’s claims regarding the mitigating circumstances. The Court pointed out that provocation was sufficient, as Tomleden's insults immediately preceded the fight, and it acknowledged Urbano's lack of intent to commit a grave wrong when he punched Tomleden.

Mitigating Circumstances

The Court recognized that two mitigating circumstances were present: (1) Urbano's lack of intention to commit a grave wrong, which was evidenced by his attempts to avoid the altercation and assist Tomleden after the fight; and (2) sufficient provocation from Tomleden, as established by witness accounts of Tomleden’s insulting remarks before the incident.

Ap

...continue reading

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