G.R. No. L-1477.
January 18, 1950
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
JULIO GUILLEN, defendant-appellant.
Facts:
Julio Guillen has voted for the defeated candidate in the presidential
elections held in 1946. According to Guillen, he became disappointed in
President Roxas – the successful candidate - for his alleged failure to fulfill
the promises made by him during the presidential election campaign.
Hence, he was determined to assassinate the President.
He decided to carry out his plan at the pro-parity meeting held at
Plaza de Miranda on the night of March 10, 1947. When he reached Plaza
de Miranda, Guillen was carrying two hand grenades concealed in a paper
bag. He buried one of the hand grenades, in a plant pot located close to the
platform. He stood on the chair on which he had been sitting and, he
hurled the grenade at the President when the latter had just closed his
speech. General Castañeda, who was on the platform, saw the grenade and
kicked it away from the platform, and towards an open space; and
covering the President with his body. The grenade exploded in the middle
of a group of persons who were standing close to the platform. It was
found that the fragments of the grenade had seriously injured Simeon
Varela, who died on the following day as the result of mortal wounds
caused by the fragments of the grenade Alfredo Eva, Jose Fabio, Pedro
Carrillo and Emilio Maglalang.
Issue:
Whether the appellant is guilty of murder for the death of Simeon Varela
and of the complex crime of murder and multiple attempted murder
Ruling:
Yes, in throwing hand grenade at the President with the intention of
killing him, the appellant acted with malice. He is therefore liable for all the
consequences of his wrongful act.
In accordance with article 4 of the Revised Penal Code, criminal
liability is incurred by any person committing felony (delito) although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. In criminal
negligence, the injury caused to another should be unintentional, it being
simply the incident of another act performed without malice. Also, Article
48 of the Revised Penal Code provides that when a single act constitutes two
or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means
for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be
imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.
The killing of Simeon Varela was attended by the qualifying
circumstance of treachery. In the case of People vs. Mabug-at, supra, this
court held that the qualifying circumstance of treachery may be properly
considered, even when the victim of the attack was not the one whom the
defendant intended to kill, if it appears from the evidence that neither of
the two persons could in any manner put up defense against the attack, or
become aware of it. In the same case it was held that the qualifying
circumstance of premeditation may not be properly taken into the account
when the person whom the defendant proposed to kill was different from
the one who became his victim. Additionally, the case is clearly governed
by the first clause of article 48 because by a single act, that a throwing
highly explosive hand grenade at President Roxas, the accused committed
two grave felonies, namely: (1) murder, of which Simeon Varela was the
victim; and (2) multiple attempted murder, of which President Roxas,
Alfredo Eva, Jose Fabio, Pedro Carrillo and Emilio Maglalang were the
injured parties.
The Court further held that, the complex crimes of murder and
multiple attempted murder committed by the accused with the single act of
throwing a hand grenade at the President, was attended by the various
aggravating circumstances alleged in the information, without any
mitigating circumstance. It is their painful duty to apply the law and mete
out to the accused the extreme penalty provided by it upon the facts and
circumstances hereinabove narrated. They have affirmed the sentence of
the trial court by death sentence and shall be executed in accordance with
article 81 of the Revised Penal Code, under authority of the Director of
Prisons, on such working day as the trial court may fix within 30 days from
the date the record shall have been remanded.
