: People of the Philippines vs. Lamahang G.R. No.
L-43530, August 3, 1935
Facts:
The accused, Lamahang, was charged with murde Case r for the death of Mariano Abao.
The prosecution presented evidence showing Lamahang stabbed Abao with a bolo.
The prosecution argued that Lamahang acted with intent to kill.
The defense claimed Lamahang acted in self-defense, stating Abao attacked him first.
Issue:
- Was the accused guilty of murder or did he act in self-defense?
Ruling:
The Supreme Court found the accused guilty of murder.
Case Digest: People vs. Villacorte, 55 SCRA 640, February 28, 1974
Case: People of the Philippines vs. Villacorte
Facts:
The accused, Villacorte, was charged with murder for the death of one Antonio G. Magbanua.
The prosecution presented evidence that Villacorte, with intent to kill, shot Magbanua with a
revolver.
The defense argued that Villacorte acted in self-defense, claiming that Magbanua had attacked
him first.
Issue:
Whether the accused acted in self-defense or committed murder.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court found the accused guilty of murder.
Case: People of the Philippines vs. Honrada
Facts:
- The accused, Honrada, stabbed the offended party in the abdomen, penetrating the liver, and in
the chest.
- The offended party received prompt and skillful medical treatment, which saved their life.
Issue:
- Whether the accused is guilty of attempted murder or frustrated murder.
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court ruled that the accused is guilty of frustrated murder.
Case Digest: People vs. Mercado, 51 Phil. 99
Case: People of the Philippines vs. Mercado
Facts:
The accused, Mercado, wounded the victim in the left abdomen with a sharp-edged weapon,
causing a wound in the peritoneal cavity. The wound was serious enough to have produced
death.
Issue:
Whether the accused is guilty of attempted murder or frustrated murder.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled that the accused is guilty of attempted murder.
Case Digest: People vs. David, 60 Phil. 93
Case: People of the Philippines vs. David
Facts:
The accused, David, fired his revolver at the offended party, hitting them in the upper side of the
body.
The bullet pierced the victim's body from side to side and perforated their lungs.
The victim was saved due to adequate and timely medical intervention.
Issue:
- Whether the accused is guilty of attempted murder or frustrated murder.
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court ruled that the accused is guilty of frustrated murder.
a. U.S. vs. Bien, 20 Phil. 354:
- Facts: The accused threw a man into deep water, knowing he couldn't swim. The victim clung
to the boat, but the accused tried to loosen his grip with an oar. He was stopped by others.
- Why Attempted: The accused had the intent to kill, and he performed acts directly related to
that intent (throwing the victim overboard). However, he was prevented from completing the act
of killing by external factors (other people intervening). This means he didn't complete all the
acts of execution necessary to cause death.
b. People vs. Kalalo, et al., 59 Phil. 715:
- Facts: The accused fired four shots at the victim while the victim was fleeing. The shots
missed.
- Why Attempted: The accused had the intent to kill, and he performed acts directly related to
that intent (firing the gun). However, he failed to hit the victim due to poor aim or the victim's
evasive action. This means he didn't complete all the acts of execution necessary to cause
death.
c. People vs. Domingo, CA-G.R. No. 14222-R, April 11, 1956:
- Facts: The victim sustained wounds, but medical experts disagreed on whether they were
serious enough to cause death. One expert said the wounds were not fatal even without medical
assistance.
- Why Attempted: The wounds were not considered mortal, meaning they were not serious
enough to cause death on their own. The accused did not complete all the acts of execution
necessary to cause death.
d. People vs. Somera, et al., 52 O.G. 3973:
- Facts: The victim was grazed by a bullet, but the wound was not fatal.
- Why Attempted: Similar to case "c", the wound was not serious enough to cause death. The
accused did not complete all the acts of execution necessary to cause death.
G. Differentiate attempted or frustrated felony from impossible crime.
An attempted felony occurs when the offender performs an overt act towards the commission
of a crime but fails to complete it due to circumstances beyond their control.
A frustrated felony happens when the offender performs all the acts of execution that would
produce the felony as a consequence but fails to complete the crime due to some cause or
accident independent of the offender's will.
An impossible crime is when the offender performs an act that would be a crime if the
circumstances were as he believed them to be, but the circumstances are not as he believes
them to be, and the act is not actually a crime.
Difference between attempted and frustrated felonies, and impossible crimes, Attempted and
frustrated felonies involve the offender taking steps to commit a crime, but failing due to
external factors beyond their control. In attempted crimes, the offender doesn't complete the
act, while in frustrated crimes, the act is completed but the intended result doesn't
occur.impossible crimes involve an inherent impossibility in the act itself, meaning the crime
could never have been committed even if the offender had completed all the steps, as the
circumstances make it inherently impossible.
I. What must be considered in determining whether the crime is attempted, frustrated or
consummated.
To determine whether a crime is attempted, frustrated or consummated, the following factors
must be considered:
- The intent of the offender: The offender must have the intent to commit the crime.
- The overt acts performed by the offender: The offender must have performed some overt act
towards the commission of the crime.
- The circumstances surrounding the crime: The circumstances surrounding the crime must be
considered, such as the time, place, and manner in which the crime was committed.
