Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library


Home of Chan Robles Virtual Law Library




[G.R. No. 1951. July 15, 1905. ]

THE UNITED STATES, Complainant-Appellee, v. CANDIDO BADINES ET. AL., Defendants-Appellants.

H.D. Green and Manuel Lugo, for Appellants.

Solicitor-General Araneta, for Appellee.


1. CRIMINAL LAW; HOMICIDE; PRINCIPALS AN ACCOMPLICES. — Under the provisions of article 13 and 14 of the Penal Code, when one cooperates in the execution of a crime by simultaneous acts, penalty must be imposed upon him as an accomplice and not as a principal, unless it further appears that these acts were such that without them the offense could not have been committed.



From the evidence introduced by the trial of this case we are of opinion that the appellants are guilty of the crime of homicide, with which they are charged, Pascasio Davasol as principal, and Candido Badines, Potenciano Davasol, and Refunio Davasol as accomplices.

The trial court found all and each of the accused guilty as principals, but it is to be observed that while Candido Badines, Potenciano Davasol, and Rufino Davasol "cooperated in the execution of the crime by other simultaneous acts," these acts were not such that "without them it could not have been accomplished," and therefore, under the provisions of articles 13 and 14 of the Penal Code, they are guilty as accomplices and not as principals.

The trial court further found that in the commission f the offense the accused took "advantage of the superior strength," an for that reason the penalty was imposed in its maximum degree, under the provisions of paragraph 9 of article 10 of the Penal Code. We find no evidence in the case to support this finding, for it appears that the fatal blow was struck during a quarrel which whose arose unexpectedly over a game of cards, and that the principal aggressor and his victim were at that time engage against each other as man to man, so that the accused has no such advantage of superior strength, as is contemplated in the above-mentioned provisions of the code.

We are of opinion that the judgment and the sentence of the trial court should be reversed and that there should be imposed upon Pascasio Davasol the penalty of seventeen years reclusion temporal, wit the accessory penalties prescribed in article 59 of the Penal Code, and upon Candido Badines, Potenciano Davasol and each of them, the penalty of eight years and one day prision mayor, with the accessory penalties prescribe in article 57 of the said code; and that all the defendants, jointly and severally, should pay an indemnity of P1,00 Philippine currency, to the heirs of the deceased, and each of them one-fourth of the costs of the trial in both instances. So ordered.

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

Top of Page