Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

1 | SAISES

PEOPLE vs ALBUQUERQUE

GR Number/ Case Date: G.R. No. L-38773, December 19, 1933


Ponente: Avancena, CJ
Petitioners: THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Plaintiff-Appellee,
Respondents: GINES ALBURQUERQUE Y SANCHEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Subject: Crim1
Topic: Elements of criminal liability -> mental element -> transferred intent -> praeter intentionem
Rule of Law:

Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. The following are mitigating circumstances;


xxxx

3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.

Xxxx

Art. 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different
from that intended. In cases in which the felony committed is different from that which
the offender intended to commit, the following rules shall be observed:
1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that
corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit, the penalty
corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum period.

2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that
corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit, the penalty for the
former shall be imposed in its maximum period.

3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be applicable if the
acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of
another crime, if the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter offenses,
in which case the penalty provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall
be imposed in its maximum period.

Art. 249. Homicide. Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall
kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next
preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion
temporal.

Facts:

Appeal on the decision that found Gines Alburquerque guilty of the crime of homicide
committed against Manuel Osma. Sentence: eight years and one day of prision mayor, and
to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000, with costs.
2 | SAISES

Gines Albuquerque, 55 y/o, widower, father of 9, partially paralyzed, walks dragging one leg
and has lost control of the movement of his right arm. He lives with Maria upon whom they
depend for support.
End of 1928- Another daughter, Pilar, had intimate relations with Manuel Osma. Gines
became acquainted with the Manuel who frequently visited Pilar in his house.
Pilar and Manuel bore a child, but Gines did not know she was pregnant. Gines only learned
the truth when Pilar returned home with her child.
Gines was deeply affected because of the dishonor it brought to his family and because the
child is an added burden to Maria.
Gines wrote letters, some hostile and threatening at other times entreating Manuel marry
Pilar, or at least, to support her and his child. But Manuel never complied with his promise of
monthly child support.
Gines went to the office of Manuel. They both went downstairs. There were no witnesses.
GInes inflicted a wound at the base of the neck of Manuel, causing his death.
Court: inferred from the testimony Gines that he proposed to said deceased to marry his
daughter and that, upon hearing that the Manuel refused, he whipped out his penknife.
Manuel tried to seize him by the neck whereupon Gines stabbed him on the face with the
said penknife. Due to his lack of control of the movement of his arm, the weapon landed on
the base of the neck of Manuel.
Trial Court: Gines did not intend to cause so grave an injury as the death of the deceased.
Gines claimed he only wanted to inflict a wound that would leave a permanent scar
on the face, or one that would compel him to remain in the hospital for a week or
two but never intended to kill Manuel (because then it would frustrate his plan of
compelling him to marry or, at least, support Pilar).
Gines stated this intention in some of his letters to the deceased by way of a threat
to induce him to accept his proposal for the benefit of Pilar. That the act of the
appellant in stabbing the deceased resulted in the fatal wound at the base of his
neck, was because he doesnt have control over his arm.
Mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to cause so grave an injury as the death
of the deceased as well as those of his having voluntarily surrendered himself to the
authorities, and acted under the influence of passion and obfuscation, should be
taken into consideration in favor of the appellant.
Issue: WON Gines Albuquerque acted in legitimate self-defense.

No. The court cannot entertain the appellant's contention that he acted in legitimate self-
defense inasmuch as he provoked and commenced the aggression by whipping out and
brandishing his penknife.
Gines: at all events, article 49 of RPC, which refers to cases where the crime committed is
different from that intended by the accused, should be applied herein.
3 | SAISES

SC: This article is a reproduction of Article 64 of the old Code and has been
interpreted as applicable only in cases where the crime befalls a different person ,
which is not the case herein.
Gines Albuquerque committed a crime of homicide (article 249 of RPC) penalized with
reclusion temporal.
Because of three mitigating circumstances and without any aggravating
circumstance, the penalty next lower in degree, that is prision mayor, should be
imposed.

Ruling: Appellant is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of from one (1) year of
prision correccional to eight (8) years and (1) day of prision mayor, affirming the judgment appealed
from in all other respects, with the costs.