TodayisMonday,June26,2017

CustomSearch

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila

ENBANC

G.R.No.L12155February2,1917

THEUNITEDSTATES,plaintiffappellee,
vs.
PROTASIOEDUAVE,defendantappellant.

ManuelRoxasforappellant.
AttorneyGeneralAvanceaforappellee.

MORELAND,J.:

Webelievethattheaccusedisguiltyoffrustratedmurder.

We are satisfied that there was an intent to kill in this case. A deadly weapon was used. The blow was directed
towardavitalpartofthebody.Theaggressorstatedhispurposetokill,thoughthehadkilled,andthrewthebody
intothebushes.Whenhegavehimselfuphedeclaredthathehadkilledthecomplainant.

Therewasalevosiatoqualifythecrimeasmurderifdeathhadresulted.Theaccusedrusheduponthegirlsuddenly
andstruckherfrombehind,inpartatleast,withasharpbolo,producingafrightfulgashinthelumbarregionand
slightlytothesideeightandonehalfincheslongandtwoinchesdeep,severingallofthemusclesandtissuesof
thatpart.

The motive of the crime was that the accused was incensed at the girl for the reason that she had theretofore
chargedhimcriminallybeforethelocalofficialswithhavingrapedherandwithbeingthecauseofherpregnancy.He
washermother'squeridoandwaslivingwithherassuchatthetimethecrimeherechargedwascommitted.

Thattheaccusedisguiltyofsomecrimeisnotdenied.Theonlyquestionistheprecisecrimeofwhichheshouldbe
convicted.Itiscontended,inthefirstplace,that,ifdeathhasresulted,thecrimewouldnothavebeenmurderbut
homicide,andinthesecondplace,thatitisattemptedandnotfrustratedhomicide.

As to the first contention, we are of the opinion that the crime committed would have been murder if the girl had
beenkilled.Itisqualifiedbythecircumstanceofalevosia,theaccusedmakingasuddenattackuponhisvictimfrom
therear,orpartlyfromtherear,anddealingheraterribleblowinthebackandsidewithhisbolo.Suchanattack
necessitatesthefindingthatitwasmadetreacherouslyandthatbeingsothecrimewouldhavebeenqualifiedas
murderifdeathhadresulted.

Astothesecondcontention,weareoftheopinionthatthecrimewasfrustratedandnotattemptedmurder.Article3
ofthePenalCodedefinesafrustratedfelonyasfollows:

Afelonyisfrustratedwhentheoffenderperformsalltheactsofexecutionwhichshouldproducethefelonyas
aconsequence,butwhich,nevertheless,donotproduceitbyreasonofcausesindependentofthewillofthe
perpetrator.

Anattemptedfelonyisdefinedthus:

Thereisanattemptwhentheoffendercommencesthecommissionofthefelonydirectlybyovertacts,and
doesnotperformalltheactsofexecutionwhichconstitutethefelonybyreasonofsomecauseoraccident
otherthanhisownvoluntarilydesistance.

Thecrimecannotbeattemptedmurder.Thisisclearfromthefactthatthedefendantperformedalloftheactswhich
shouldhaveresultedintheconsummatedcrimeandvoluntarilydesistedfromfurtheracts.Acrimecannotbeheldto
beattemptedunlesstheoffender,afterbeginningthecommissionofthecrimebyovertacts,isprevented,against
hiswill,bysomeoutsidecausefromperformingalloftheactswhichshouldproducethecrime.Inotherwords,tobe
anattemptedcrimethepurposeoftheoffendermustbethwartedbyaforeignforceoragencywhichintervenesand
compelshimtostoppriortothemomentwhenhehasperformedalloftheactswhichshouldproducethecrimeasa
consequence,whichactsitishisintentiontoperform.Ifhehasperformedalloftheactswhichshouldresultinthe
consummationofthecrimeandvoluntarilydesistsfromproceedingfurther,itcannotbeanattempt.Theessential
elementwhichdistinguishesattemptedfromfrustratedfelonyisthat,inthelatter,thereisnointerventionofaforeign
orextraneouscauseoragencybetweenthebeginningofthecommissionofthecrimeandthemomentwhenallof
the acts have been performed which should result in the consummated crime while in the former there is such
intervention and the offender does not arrive at the point of performing all of the acts which should produce the
crime.Heisstoppedshortofthatpointbysomecauseapartfromhisvoluntarydesistance.

Toputitinanotherway,incaseofanattempttheoffenderneverpassesthesubjectivephaseoftheoffense.Heis
interruptedandcompelledtodesistbytheinterventionofoutsidecausesbeforethesubjectivephaseispassed.

Ontheotherhand,incaseoffrustratedcrimesthesubjectivephaseiscompletelypassed.Subjectivelythecrimeis
complete.Nothinginterruptedtheoffenderwhilehewaspassingthroughthesubjectivephase.Thecrime,however,
isnotconsummatedbyreasonoftheinterventionofcausesindependentofthewilloftheoffender.Hedidallthat
wasnecessarytocommitthecrime.Ifthecrimedidnotresultasaconsequenceitwasduetosomethingbeyondhis
control.

The subjective phase is that portion of the acts constituting the crime included between the act which begins the
commissionofthecrimeandthelastactperformedbytheoffenderwhich,withtheprioracts,shouldresultinthe
consummatedcrime.Fromthattimeforwardthephaseisobjective.Itmayalsobesaidtobethatperiodoccupied
by the acts of the offender over which he has control that period between the point where he begins and the
points where he voluntarilydesists. If between these two points the offender is stopped by reason of any cause
outsideofhisownvoluntarydesistance,thesubjectivephasehasnotbeenpassedanditisanattempt.Ifheisnot
sostoppedbutcontinuesuntilheperformsthelastact,itisfrustrated.

Thatthecasebeforeusisfrustratedisclear.

The penalty should have been thirteen years of cadena temporal there being neither aggravating nor mitigating
circumstance.Assomodified,thejudgmentisaffirmedwithcosts.Soordered.

TorresandAraullo,JJ.,concur.
CarsonandTrent,JJ.,concurintheresult.

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation