G.R. NO. 166326 – 515 Phil. 824 – 480 SCRA 188 – Criminal Law – Book 1 – General Principles – Elements of a Crime – Mens Rea – Criminal Intent – Intent to Kill
Victim, Ruben went to a nearby store to buy food. Accused Rivera was in the same vicinity. When he saw Ruben, Rivera mocked Ruben for being jobless and dependent on his wife. This caused an exchange of heated words between the two.
The next day when Ruben and his daughter were once again buying food, Rivera and two other men attacked Ruben. The two men punched and mauled Ruben while Rivera, on the other hand, got a hollowblock and hit Rubens’s head with it three times. Rivera and his companions left only when the policemen arrived.
Ruben was brought to the hospital and it was said that he suffered only slight and superficial wounds but were it not for the arrival of the policemen, Ruben would have died.
TC- the three are guilty of frustrated murder.
CA- affirmed the decision of the trial court, with modifications.
ISSUE: Whether or not there was INTENT TO KILL.
HELD: Yes. There is intent to kill in the case at bar.
The pieces of evidence required to prove intent to kill are as follows:
1.means used by the malefactors
2.nature,location and number of wounds sustained by the victim
3. conduct of the malefactor before, during and after the commission of the crime,
4.circumstances under which the crime was committed
5. motive of the accused.
Applying the elements to the case at bar, the means or weapons used by RIVERA is a piece of hollow block.
As to nature, location and number of wounds, Rivera inflicted injuries on the head of Ruben three times.
Conduct before during and after the commission of the crime, Rivera was angry at Ruben because of the circumstances that transpired between Ruben and him…
Case Digest provided by: Rosanna Tamayo
