Bosalino Rodriguez  is charged with having dealt Marciano Magno two blows with the fist,  one on the left side toward  the  stomach  and  the other on  the  back, which knocked him down.  He got  up by the assistance of two witnesses who were present  at the time of the occurrence and by their aid endeavored to return to his  home, which he did not reach, for the reason that, having gone a distance of twenty brazas from the place, he again fell to the ground, this time dead.
   
Two witnesses testified  to having  seen the defendant strike  those two blows.
 
The following were offered by the defendant as defenses: (1) The testimony of his daughter and two other witnesses; (2)  the fact that his  right  hand was disabled; and (3) the medical certificate issued by a physician as a result of the autopsy.
 
The defendant's daughter averred that it was she who struck Marciano Magno  the  blow  with the fist, for the reason that the deceased had  caught hold of her hand with unchaste designs, and testified that her father arrived after Magno had fallen to the ground, which testimony was supported,by two witnesses.
 
This defense was not sustained by the trial judge.  But on the contrary, he accepted the preponderance of evidence for the prosecution, sustained by three witnesses, of whom two were eyewitnesses to the crime, and the other, of the confession alleged to have been made to him by the defendant when  arrested by this witness, to the effect that the victim's death was an unlooked-for misfortune.
 
Nor  was the defense advanced by the defendant to the effect that his  right hand was crippled and he was unable to  work with it sustained by the trial court, and rightly, since,  as the defendant testified, he worked with his left hand and  sometimes used a  spoon  with his  right; moreover, it was not proved that  it was impossible for him to strike blows with either hand.
 
The defense  founded on the medical examination of the corpse consists in that the physician who made the autopsy declared that he had  observed  hypertrophy of  the heart, a discharge in  the spleen,  an  increase of this latter organ to four times its ordinary  size,  and abdominal peritonitis; and in  that, according to  this  examination, the  cause  of death can  not be determined  for the blows which he  may have received could have coincided with the traumatism, and "the  traumatisms which  that body received  hastened the death of the said individual;" and, finally, this witness being questioned by the defense as to whether the cause of death was a traumatism or a shock, replied that he was unable to determine which it was.
 
As was  proper, neither was  this  defense sustained by the trial judge.   The defendant was, therefore, found guilty of the crime of homicide and sentenced to twelve years and one  day of reclusion temporal,  to the accessory  penalties and an  indemnity of M.,000 to  the  heirs of the  deceased, and to the payment of the  costs; from which judgment he appealed.
 
This appeal, forwarded from the Court of First  Instance of Nueva Ecija, having been heard, together with the allegations and arguments therein made by the parties, whereby  it appears  to have been well proven that  the defendant did strike Marciano Magno in the abdomen and in the back two blows with his hand, as a result of which the latter fell to the ground, and scarcely had he gotten up and started to walk when  he  fell down  dead, we hold  that the crime is properly classified as  homicide  and that Rosalino Rodriguez is responsible therefor,

A blow with the fist or a kick, though causing no external wound, may very  well produce inflammation of the spleen and peritonitis and cause death; and although the assaulted party was previously affected by some internal  malady,  if, because of a blow given with the hand or the foot, his death was hastened, beyond peradventure he is responsible therefor who produced the cause  for such acceleration as the result of a voluntary and unlawfully inflicted injury.

But in the complaint itself it is  alleged  that the cause of the assault was  the fact  that the defendant saw the deceased catch hold of his daughter Roberta's  hand, for the purpose of making love to her, and the provincial fiscal stated at the trial that this assertion was the result of a careful investigation  made by him, which was indeed confirmed by the facts proven.

It therefore appears that the defendant's act was preceded by an immediate provocation on the part of the deceased, and,  evidently, the defendant did not intend to cause  so grave an injury as he produced.

With the existence of these two well-defined extenuating circumstances and without any  aggravating circumstance, rule 5 of article 81 of the Penal Code must  be applied and the penalty  immediately inferior to that fixed by law imposed.  Consequently, modifying the penalty imposed by the lower court to eight years and one day of prision mayor, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the appellant.  So ordered.

Mapa, Johnson, Carson, and Trent, JJ., concur.