U.S. vs. Ah Chong 15 Phil. 488 Facts: Ah Chong was a cook in Ft. McKinley. He was afraid of bad elements.

One evening, before going to bed, he locked himself in his room by placing a chair against the door. After having gone to bed, he was awakened by someone trying to open the door. He called out twice, Who is there, but received no answer. Fearing that the intruder was a robber, he leaped from his bed & called out again, If you enter the room I will kill you. But at that precise moment, he was struck by the chair that had been placed against the door, & believing that he was being attacked he seized a kitchen knife & struck & fatally wounded the intruder who turned out to be his roommate. Issue: Is Ah Chong criminally liable for the fatal wound he inflicted on his roommate? Held: Ah Chong must be acquitted because of mistake of fact. Ratio: Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed them to be, he would have been justified in killing the intruder under Art.11, par.1, of the RPC, which requires, to justify the act, that there be: unlawful aggression on the part of the person killed, reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it, & lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself If the intruder was really a robber, forcing his way into the room of Ah Chong, there would have been unlawful aggression on the part of the intruder. There would have been a necessity on the part of Ah Chong to defend himself and/or his home. The knife would have been a reasonable means to prevent or repel such aggression. And Ah Chong gave no provocation at all. Under Art.11 of the RPC, there is nothing unlawful in the intention as well as in the act of the person making the defense. People vs. OanisG.R. No. L-47722 July 27, 1943 Facts: As a group taking the route to Rizal street, Chief of Police Antonio Z. Oanis and his co-accused Corporal Alberto Galanta were under instructions to arrest Anselmo Balagtas, a notorious criminal and escaped convict, and if overpowered, to get him dead or alive. Proceeding to the suspected house, they went into a room and on seeing a man sleeping with his back towards the door, simultaneously fired at him with their .32 and .45 caliber revolvers, without first making any reasonable inquiry as to his identity. The victim turned out to be a peaceful and innocent citizen, Serapio Tecson who upon autopsy, multiple gunshot wounds were found on his body which caused his death. The defendants alleged and appealed that in the honest performance of their official duties, they acted in innocent mistake of fact. Issue: Whether or not Chief of Police Oanis and Corporal Galanta were guilty of murder. Ruling: New Rules of Court, Rule 109, Section 2 paragraph 2 provides, No unnecessary or unreasonable force shall be used in making an arrest, and the person arrested shall not be subject to any greater restraint than is necessary for his detention. As the deceased was killed while asleep, the crime committed by both was murder. Even if it were true that the victim was the notorious criminal, the accused would not be justified in killing him while the latter was sleeping. In apprehending even the most notorious criminal, the law does not permit the captor to kill him. It is only when the fugitive from justice is determined to fight the officers of the law who are trying to capture him that killing him would be justified.

People vs. Basas Facts: December 2, 1975 Gloria Badilla, 18 yrs., a first year high school student, was sexually abused by Leonardo Basas, Nestor Gregorio, Rogelio Cadag and Gerardo Maingat. The accused dragged her to a vacant hut located in the Don Bosco School compound. On reaching the hut, Basas and his companions removed her pink school uniform & uderwear. The four, helping each other, held her hands and feet, boxed her thighs, pulled her hair, and covered her mouth. She resisted and shouted for help. They forced her to lie down. They removed their clothes and took turns in sexually abusing her. After the incident, Glorias parents were called. She and her parents, accompanied by Villaruel and Montecillo, went to the house of the barangay chairman to report the matter. By coincidence, Ruben and the four accused happened to be in the barangay chairmans house. Then and there, Gloria pointed to the four accused as her rapists. The next day Gloria was examined by Doctor Angelo S. Singia. He certified that there could have been penetration of the labia majora but not deep enough to lacerate the hymen and that the vagina was negative for sperm. Issue: Whether or not the act of the accused were consummated. Held: The rupturing of the hymen is not indispensable to a conviction of the consummated crime of rape; entry of the labia of the female organ without rupture or laceration is generally held to be sufficient.

Basas, Gregorio and Cadag were each sentenced to four indeterminate penalties of nine years of prision mayor medium as minimum to fifteen years of reclusion temporal medium as maximum and to pay solidarily Gloria Badilla an indemnity of P20,000. The death penalty is not imposable in this case. Cadag, Basas, and Gregorio were over 15 but below eighteen when the crime was committed. People vs. Kalalo Facts: Kalalo and Isabela Holgado had a litigation case over a parcel of land situated in Batangas. Kalalo cultivated the land but come harvest time, Isabela reaped all that had been planted. Arcadio, brother of Isabela, hired workers to plow the land. Kalalo found out that the land is being plowed of the harvest. Kalalo then went at the subject land with 6 other relatives. Kalalo and his relatives came and approached Arcadio Holgadio and Marcelino Panaligan( boss with a gun). After a remark by Fausta Abrenica, mother of Kalalos, the Kalalos, armed with bolos, slashed Arcadio and Marcelino wherein the 2 died instantly. Arcadio had 6 wounds while Marcelino 14. Kalalo took Marcelinos revolver and fired at Hilarion Holgado who was already fleeing. The accused argued they were attacked first and it was self-defense but it was contradicted by the testimony of Gutierrez, an uninterested party who saw the incident. Issue: W/N the accused were guilty of Murder or Simple Homicide W/N Marcelo Kalalo was guilty of attempted homicide on Hilarion for firing the gun at him. Ruling: Marcelino was armed with a revolver while Arcadio with a bolo. The risk was even for the contending parties and their strength was almost balanced since a revolver is just as effective, if not more so, than 3 bolos. Thus, the death of the two was merely crimes of homicide. There is no qualifying or generic circumstance of abuse of superior strength. Marcelo Kalalo fired 4 successive shots at Hilarion. Immediately before doing so, he and his co-accused had already killed Arcadio and Marcelino. This shows he was bent on killing Hilarion. He performed everything necessary to commit the crime but by reason of causes independent of his will, either because of poor aim or dodging by Hilarion, none found its mark. Thus, such act only constituted Attempted Homicide. Judgment MODIFIED.