PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. FAUSTA GONZALES et.

al
GR NO. 80762| March 19, 1990 | Sarmiento
Felonies

DOCTRINE:

FACTS:
 Paja, a barangay captain was awakened by the Spouses Augusto and Fausta Gonzales to inform the latter of
the killing that they had committed against one Penacerrada.
 An information was later filed charging the spouses of the crime of murder for the said killing.
 Upon arraignment, the spouses pled not guilty.However Huntoria appeared and offered to testify as to the
killing of the Penacerrada. He testified that he saw all the accused(6 in all) taking turns hacking and stabbing
Penacerrada which caused his death
 On the reason thereof, the other siblings of as well as the father of Augusto, Custodio. Gonzales Sr. were also
impleaded for the crime of murder.
 RTC: Convicted all accused
 CA: Affirmed RTC. Only Custodio Sr. appealed

ISSUE:
Whether or not Custodio Sr. should be liable for Murder

HELD:

No. While Huntoria saw, all the six accused taking turns in hacking and stabbing the victim, he could not determine
with particularity who among the six did the stabbing/hacking or what particular weapon was used by each. Hence,
Huntoria failed to impute the specific act committed by Custodio Sr.

To incur criminal liability, Sec 4 in relation to Sec 3 of the Revised Penal Code must be satisfied. Section 4 provides
that criminal liability may be incurred by “ By any person performing an act which would be an offense against
persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment
of inadequate or ineffectual means. Section 3 on the other hand provides that “Acts and omissions punishable by law
are felonies” However in this case, there was no proof of what act was performed by Custodio Sr. to inflict bodily
harm to Penacerrada which caused his death. Thus Huntoria’s testimony fails to satisfy the requisites for Custodio Sr.
to incur any criminal liability. Hence, he is acquitted.