Criminal Law Case No.
19
Group 4 - Daniele Locsin
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. FERNANDO DE
FERNANDO
G.R. No. L-24978
March 27, 1926
Plaintif: THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS
Defenant: FERNANDO DE FERNANDO
Ponente: VILLA-REAL, J.
FACTS:
Before the day of the crime several Moro prisoners had escaped from the
Penal Colony of San Ramon, Zamboanga. The residents of the barrio of
Municahan of the municipality of Zamboanga were alarmed by the presence
of three suspicious looking persons who were prowling around the place.
During the day of the incident, the accused Fernando de Fernando who, at
that time, was a municipal policeman, when passing in front of the house of
one Remigio Delgado, was called by the latter's daughter Paciencia
Delgado, who stated that her father wished to see him. When the policeman
came up the house Remigio Delgado informed him that three unknown and
suspicious looking persons, dressed in blue, prowling around his house. The
accused remained in the said house talking with Paciencia Delgado, both
being seated on a bench near the window. While they were thus talking, at
about 7 o'clock at night, there appeared in the dark, at about 4 meters from
the stairs, a person dressed in dark clothes, calling "Nong Miong." At the
time the accused nor Paciencia Delgado knew who was thus calling. The
accused inquired what he wanted but instead of answering he continued
advancing with bolo in hand. Upon seeing this Fernando de Fernando took
out his revolver and fired a shot in the air. As he saw that the unknown
continued to ascend the staircase he fired at him. The unknown disappeared
and ran to the house of a neighbor Leon Torres, where, after placing upon a
table the bolos that he carried, he fell on the floor and expired. Remigio
Delgado, who was in the kitchen and had recognized the voice of the
unknown, on hearing the shots ran into the parlor, took hold of the arm of
the defendant and asked him why and informed him that he had fired at his
nephew, Buenventura Paulino. The accused then repaired to the house of
the teniente of the barrio, Santiago Torres, from where he telephoned to the
chief of police advising him of what had happened.
The accused was, by the Court of First Instance, held guilty of the crime of
murder and sentenced to sufer the penalty of twenty years cadena
temporal, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Buenventura Paulino in the
sum of P1,000 and to pay the costs, by virtue of a complaint filed by the
fiscal charging with the said crime.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Fernando de Fernando indeed constituted the crime of
murder, as was held by the Court of First Instance, for the death of
Buenventura Paulino.
HELD:
No. Taking into consideration the estate of mind of the accused at the time,
as he thought of the active need to defend the residents of the house. And
the meaning that he gave to the attitude of the unknown person who was
wearing a similar attire as the prisoners at large, which was that of a
probable hostile criminal intending to enter the residence armed with a
weapon. In shooting the latter, he felt that he was performing his duty and
such act cannot constitute the crime of murder, but only that of simple
homicide.
The accused is guilty only because he failed to exercise the ordinary
diligence which, under the circumstances, he should have by investigating
whether or not the unknown man was really what he thought him to be. In
firing the shot, without first exercising reasonable diligence, he acted with
reckless negligence.
The crime committed by the caused, therefore, is homicide through reckless
negligence defined and punished in article 568, in relation with article 404,
of the Penal Code, the penalty prescribed by law arresto mayor in its
maximum degree to prision correcional in its minimum degree.
Hence, the accused is held guilty of the crime of homicide through reckless
negligence, and he is sentenced to sufer one year prision correcional, to
pay the amount of P500 to the heirs of the deceased as an indemnity, with
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, the costs and with credit of
one-half of the preventive imprisonment already sufered.
