Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The court decided to reverse and set aside its former decision. Appellants Ong and De Ming @ Tiu are
acquitted of the crime of the violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as amended, and are
ordered immediately released from custody unless held for some other lawful cause.
Calimutan v. People
G.R. No. 152133, February 9, 2006
Lesson: Proof beyond reasonable doubt, Defense of Stranger, Proximate Cause, intentional
felonies and culpable felonies
Laws Applicable: Art. 3, Art. 4, Par. 1
o
o
o
FACTS:
February 4, 1996 around 10 am: Cantre and witness Saano, together with two other companions,
had a drinking spree at a videoke bar but as they were headed home, they crossed paths with
Calimutan and Michael Bulalacao.
Cantre, 26 years old and 5 ft. 9 inches, had a grudge against Bulalacao, a 15 year-old boy of 5ft. for
suspecting that he threw stones at the his house on a previous night so he punched him
Seeking to protect Bulalacao and to stop Cantre, Calimutan picked a stone, as big as a mans fist
and hitting Cantre at the left side of his back not noticing that Bulalacao was already able to ran
away.
Cantre stopped for a moment and held his back and Calimutan desisted from any other act of
violence
Witness Saano then brought Cantre home where he complained of backache and also of stomach
ache and was unable to eat
By night time, he felt cold then warm then he was sweating profusely and his entire body felt numb
Having no vehicle, they could not bring him to a doctor so his mother just continue to wipe him with a
piece of cloth and brought him some food when he asked.
After eating a little, he vomited.
Shortly after complaining again of his backache and stomach ache, he died.
The Post-Mortem Examination Report and Certification of Death, issued and signed by Dr. Ulanday,
stated that the cause of death of victim Cantre was cardio-respiratory arrest due to suspected food
poisoning
With the help of the Lingkod Bayan-Circulo de Abogadas of the ABS-CBN Foundation, an autopsy
was done by Dr. Ronaldo B. Mendez which showed that there was internal hemorrhage and massive
accumulation of blood in his abdominal cavity due to his lacerated spleen caused by a blunt object
like a stone.
RTC issued a warrant of arrest and during arraignment Calimutan pleaded not guilty to the crime of
homicide
RTC: Essentially adopting the prosecutions account of the incident, held that Calimutan was guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of homicide with a penalty of imprisonment from 8 years of Prision Mayor
as minimum, to 12 years and 1 day of Reclusion Temporal as maximum, and to indemnify the heirs
of Philip Cantre the sum of P50,000 as compensatory damages and the sum of P50,000 as moral
damages
o NOT defense of stranger , because after the boxing Bulalacao, he was able to run thereby the
unlawful aggression by Cantre ceased
o The act of throwing a stone from behind which hit the victim at his back on the left side was a
treacherous
o criminally liable for all the direct and natural consequences of this unlawful act even if the ultimate
result had not been intended
Calimutan filed a petition for review on certiorari contending that the dissimilar findings on the cause
of death constituted reasonable doubt
ISSUE: W/N he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide
HELD: NO. MODIFIED Calimutan is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide, under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code, and is accordingly
sentenced to imprisonment for a minimum period of 4 months of arresto mayor to a maximum period
of two years and one day of prision correccional. Petitioner Calimutan is further ORDERED to pay
the heirs of the victim Cantre the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for the latters death and
P50,000.00 as moral damages
Proof beyond reasonable doubt requires only a moral certainty or that degree of proof which
produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind (NOT absolute certainty and the exclusion of all
possibility of error)
o Dr. Mendezs testimony as an expert witness is evidence, and although it does not necessarily bind
the courts, it is accorded great weight and probative value
may sufficiently establish the causal relationship between the stone thrown by the Calimutan and the
lacerated spleen of the Cantre which resulted in the latters death
Proximate cause - cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury, and WITHOUT which the result would NOT have occurred
o Prosecution was able to establish that the proximate cause of the death of the Cantre was the stone
thrown at him by petitioner Calimutan.
Comparing the limited autopsy conducted by Dr. Ulanday and her unconfirmed suspicion of food
poisoning of the victim Cantre, as opposed to the exhaustive autopsy performed by Dr. Mendez and
his definitive finding of a ruptured spleen as the cause of death, then the latter, without doubt,
deserves to be given credence by the courts
Article 3 of the Revised Penal Code classifies felonies according to the means by which they are
committed, in particular:
o (1) intentional felonies - existence of malicious intent
act is performed with deliberate intent (with malice)
o (2) culpable felonies - absence of malicious intent
act or omission of the offender is NOT malicious
the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill
Absence of intent, Calimutan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the culpable felony of reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code
o Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from
which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person
performing or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or occupation,
degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and
place.
The SC affirmed the trial courts holding that appellants employed superior strength in the
execution of the crime, thus qualifying the killing to murder. When appellants attacked the victim,
they had the advantage of numerical superiority and were carrying high-powered firearms;
whereas the victim was unarmed and utterly defenseless, not to mention that he was taken by
surprise by the swiftness of the assault. Clearly, there was a notorious inequality between the
strength of the victim and his assailants. The Court, however, did not sustain the trial courts
appreciation of the aggravating circumstances of band and ignominy. A band consists of at least
four armed malefactors acting together in the commission of an offense. The prosecution failed to
prove that there were at least four armed men Thelma testified that three of Isidros assailants
were armed, while Sulpicio did make any declaration as to how many of his sons attackers were
actually armed. Neither did the prosecution prove the existence of ignominy, which is a
circumstance that adds disgrace and obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime. There
was no showing that appellants deliberately employed means which would cause more suffering or
humiliation to the victim.
At the time the crime was committed the penalty for death was reclusion temporal in the
maximum period to death. In the absence of any aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the
penalty should be imposed in its medium period, or reclusion perpetua. The SC found appellants
guilty of the crime of murder, and sentenced them each to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua and to pay the heirs.