Scribd
Upload
277 views1 page

DIGEST: US Vs Eduave

1) Eduave struck a girl from behind with a sharp bolo, severing her muscles and tissues, because he was angry that she had accused him of rape and causing her pregnancy. 2) The issue is whether Eduave is guilty of a frustrated or attempted felony. 3) The court held that Eduave's crime was frustrated, not attempted, because he performed all acts that should have resulted in the felony but it did not occur due to causes beyond his control.

Uploaded by

CJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
277 views1 page

DIGEST: US Vs Eduave

1) Eduave struck a girl from behind with a sharp bolo, severing her muscles and tissues, because he was angry that she had accused him of rape and causing her pregnancy. 2) The issue is whether Eduave is guilty of a frustrated or attempted felony. 3) The court held that Eduave's crime was frustrated, not attempted, because he performed all acts that should have resulted in the felony but it did not occur due to causes beyond his control.

Uploaded by

CJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

U.S. vs.

Eduave

Facts: Protacio Eduave rushed upon a girl suddenly and struck her from behind with a sharp bolo, severing all the muscles and tissues of that
part. The motive was that the accused was incensed at the girl for charging him criminally with having raped her and with being the cause of her
pregnancy. Eduave was her mother’s querido and was living with her at the time the crime was committed.

Issue: Whether Eduave is guilty of frustrated or attempted felony

Held: We are of the opinion that the crime was frustrated and NOT attempted murder.

A felony is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which should produce the felony as a consequence, but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

An attempted felony is defined thus:

There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which constitute the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own voluntarily desistance.

In case of an attempt the offender never passes the subjective phase of the offense. He is interrupted and compelled to desist by the intervention
of outside causes before the subjective phase is passed. On the other hand, in case of frustrated crimes the subjective phase is completely
passed. Subjectively the crime is complete. Nothing interrupted the offender while he was passing through the subjective phase. The crime,
however, is not consummated by reason of the intervention of causes independent of the will of the offender. He did all that was necessary to
commit the crime. If the crime did not result as a consequence it was due to something beyond his control.

The subjective phase is that portion of the acts constituting the crime included between the act which begins the commission of the crime and
the last act performed by the offender which, with the prior acts, should result in the consummated crime. From that time forward the phase is
objective. It may also be said to be that period occupied by the acts of the offender over which he has control — that period between the point
where he begins and the points where he voluntarily desists. If between these two points the offender is stopped by reason of any cause outside
of his own voluntary desistance, the subjective phase has not been passed and it is an attempt. If he is not so stopped but continues until he
performs the last act, it is frustrated.

That the case before us is frustrated is clear.

The penalty should have been thirteen years of cadena temporal there being neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstance. As so modified, the
judgment is affirmed with costs.

You might also like