You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cf20?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[US v. PONCIANO ESMEDIA](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/cf20?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:cf20}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show as cited by other cases (1 times)
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 5749, Oct 21, 1910 ]

US v. PONCIANO ESMEDIA +

DECISION

17 Phil. 260

[ G. R. No. 5749, October 21, 1910 ]

THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. PONCIANO ESMEDIA AND MENA ESMEDIA, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

D E C I S I O N

TRENT, J.:

This is an appeal from a sentence rendered by the Court of First Instance of the Province of Antique, condemning Ponciano Esmedia and Mena Esmedia to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, to jointly and  severally pay to the heirs  of  Ciriaco Abando the sum of P1,000, to the heirs of Santiago Abando the sum of P1,000, and to pay the costs of the cause, for the crime of double homicide.

Ciriaco Abando, his wife, and their son, Santiago, lived in the jurisdiction of the municipality of Sibalom, in the barrio of Bongbongan, Province  of Antique.  Gregorio Esmedia, father of these  two accused, son-in-law of Ciriaco Abando and  brother-in-law of  Santiago Abando, lived  in the same barrio.  These two families lived  very near to each  other and  owned adjoining  rice lands.   Before this  trouble  occurred there  had been  a dispute between these two families relative to the ownership of the rice land then occupied by Ciriaco Abando.   About 2 o'clock  on the afternoon of the 24th of June, 1909, Ciriaco Abando instructed his son, Santiago, to go  to  a  certain place in his rice  field to let out the water in order that they could plant rice in the said field. In compliance with these instructions of his father, Santiago proceeded to  the place  designated, and while at work doing what he had  been ordered by his father to do,  Gregorio Esmedia appeared on the scene  and  started a  quarrel with Santiago.  Soon thereafter Gregorio  drew a  dagger and stabbed Santiago in the back.   Santiago fell to the ground, but arose immediately  and attacked Gregorio with his bolo, inflicting several wounds  on the said Gregorio in consequence of which he fell to the ground.  Before this trouble finally terminated  the  two accused and Ciriaco Abando appeared in that immediate vicinity.

These two accused contend  that they were working in their  rice field near by, and on seeing  Ciriaco Abando and Santiago  Abando  attacking their  father, Gregorio,  they started to the place to  render their father assistance, Ponciano starting first; that when Ponciano got near the place of the  trouble he was met by Ciriaco and Santiago  who attacked him with bolos and clubs and that he, Ponciano, in self-defense, knocked them both down,  and after they had fallen the other accused, Mena Esmedia, arrived.  Ponciano further contends that he did not use a bolo in this fight, but used a club only.

The prosecution in the court below contended that when these two accused saw the fight between their father and Santiago they rushed to  the place and proceeded to kill, as they thought, Santiago, and on seeing Ciriaco approaching they met him and killed him outright.

As a result of this fight Ciriaco was  left  dead on the scene,. Gregorio  received fatal wounds from which he  died within  about four hours, and Santiago also received fatal wounds from  which he died five days later.

Ciriaco Abando received two wounds on the top of his head, one  8 centimeters and the other 3 centimeters in length,  caused by  some cutting instrument, and also  sustained a fracture of the skull, apparently caused by means of a blow.   He also had a wound on the head 3 centimeters in depth; another on the neck  below  the left ear 3 1/2 centimeters  in depth and 3 centimeters  in length; the left eye was bruised and he also had a wound on the palm of the right hand 3  centimeters in length and  2  millimeters in depth.

Santiago Abando received in all seven wounds, one crosswise of the head,  back  of the left ear, 8 centimeters in length and 1  centimeter in depth,  another  on top of the head, just  above the first wound, 5 centimeters in length and a half centimeter in depth, a third wound on the left part of the neck 4 centimeters in length, all of these three wounds having  been caused by a  cutting instrument;  a fourth wound, also  caused by some  sharp  instrument,  1 centimeter in depth and 8 centimeters in length, on the top of the head; a fifth wound, 2£ centimeters in length and  5 millimeters in depth, which was in the nature of a contusion, appeared on the  frontal region of the  head; a sixth wound, 2 centimeters  in  length and 3£ centimeters  deep, in the back; and a seventh wound on the left hand, 4 centimeters in length, 2£ centimeters wide, and 2 millimeters in depth, which had apparently been caused by some cutting instrument.

The body of Gregorio Esmedia showed four wounds; a wound or bruise on tjie front of the head, 5 by 6 centimeters in dimension;  another wound, caused by a cutting instrument, running across the  head, 6  centimeters in  length; another  wound, apparently caused by  a blow with  some blunt instrument, on the breast; and another wound 1 centimeter in depth, apparently caused by  a cutting instrument, and also a bruise on the left arm.

The accused, Ponciano Esmedia, received one wound on the  head, but  it was not  of a serious  nature; the other accused,  Mena Esmedia, escaped uninjured.

The prosecution presented Andrea Lactoson, 60 years of age, wife of the  deceased Ciriaco, and Julian Alagos,  a young boy about 16 years of age, a  grandson of Ciriaco. These two witnesses saw the fight and gave a detailed account of the same.   While it is true that these two witnesses contradicted themselves to some extent on  cross-examination, they having testified on direct examination that Ciriaco never did reach the scene of the fight  but was  killed by the two accused while on his way there,  whereas on cross-examination  they testified that Ciriaco was there when the accused arrived, yet it is clear  that they intended to say that when the two accused  arrived  Ciriaco  was in  that vicinity but they did not mean to say that he was at the very side of his son.

The theory of the defense  that Ponciano was attacked by Ciriaco and Santiago is untenable, as the nature and character of the wounds on the bodies of these two persons show clearly that at least some  of them were inflicted by bolos, and Ponciano must  have used a bolo in the fight, though he contends that he only made use of a club.  The bolo wounds  on the heads  of Gregorio and  Santiago were of such a serious nature that it would  have been impossible for them to have  gone any distance after having  been wounded.  So they  could not have rushed toward Ponciano and attacked him  after  having received these wounds. Santiago was stabbed in the back by Gregtfrio, but this wound of itself was not necessarily fatal.

After a careful consideration of this entire record we are thoroughly satisfied that  the following facts, aside from those we have already related, have been  established:

The two  accused  arrived on the scene about the time the fight between Santiago and Gregorio was terminating, and on  seeing  their father, Gregorio, lying  in the mud and water, fatally wounded and  dying,  and honestly believing that Santiago, who  was standing at the time, would inflict other wounds upon their father, they, in  his defense,  immediately killed Santiago.  Ciriaco was near the scene at this time and on seeing him the two accused, under this great excitement, proceeded to attack him, and as a direct result of the blows  inflicted by them he fell to the ground, dying  immediately.  Ciriaco was an old  man,  about  80 years of age, and used a cane to assist  him in walking about.

Under the provisions of No, 5, article 8 of the Penal Code, the two accused are  exempt from criminal responsibility for having caused the death of Santiago Abando, inasmuch as it has  been shown  that they inflicted these wounds upon him in defense of their father who was fatally wounded at the time.   They honestly  believed, and had good grounds upon which to found their belief, that Santiago would continue his attack  upon their  father.  They are, however, guilty of having caused the death of the old man, Ciriaco Abando.  When they attacked and  killed him  the other trouble had terminated and  they were not in danger  of bodily harm from him.

In the commission of this crime of homicide, we must take into consideration  No. 20 of article  10 of  the Penal Code which provides, as an aggravating circumstance, that "when the act is committed with insult or  in disregard for the respect which may be  due the aggrieved party  on account  of his  rank, age,  *  *  *"  inasmuch as  the deceased, Ciriaco,  was a man 80 years of age and did not arrive on the scene until after the trouble between the two accused and Santiago had terminated.

As  we have said, these two accused killed this old man, Ciriaco, while laboring under great excitement and in the heat of passion, and it might be insisted that under these circumstances they should be given the benefit of No. 7 of article 9 of the Penal Code,  as an extenuating circumstance. This provision should be applied to reduce the penalty in cases where the provocation which caused the heated passion was made  by the  injured party.  In the case at bar the provocation was made by Santiago  and not Ciriaco, as Ciriaco  arrived after the fight had terminated and there was then no provocation  running from the old man,  Ciriaco, to these accused.  He was  entirely  unarmed and made  no demonstration and said no  word prior to the assault upon him by  the two accused.  So the state of mind into which these  two accused  were thrown by the provocation induced by Santiago can not modify the extent of their punishment for killing  the old man.  In  other words, before  this provision can be applied as  an extenuating circumstance it is necessary, as we have said, that the person injured should have executed the  act producing arrebato y obcecacion.  It can not be  applied when  an assault is made upon a person who had taken no part in the quarrel and had not in any manner provoked  the accused.   (Decision of the supreme court  of Spain  dated October  17,  1904,  published in  the Official Gazette on December 23 following; decision of the supreme court of Spain dated January 12, 1894; White vs. State, 44 Tex. Cr. Rep., 346; State vs. Jackson, 45 La. Ann., 1031; State vs. Vinso, 171 Mo., 576.)

In view of the fact that  these two  accused are ignorant the aggavating circumstance is compensated by the provisions of article 11 of the Penal Code which we applied in this case.

The sentence appealed from  is,  therefore, affirmed; provided, however, that these two accused, Ponciano Esmedia and Mena Esmedia, be condemned to fourteen years eight months and one day of reclusidn temporal, and to the accessory penalties; and, provided further, that they be declared exempt from criminal responsibility for causing the death of Santiago  Abando, which exemption relieves them from paying any  indemnity to the  heirs of the  said  Santiago Abando.

Arellano,  C.  J.,  Torres, Johnson, and  Moreland, JJ., concur.

tags