You are on page 1of 13

Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
DECISION
March 19, 191
!"R" No" #$%$
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff&appellee,
's"
AH CHONG, (efen(ant&appellant"
Gibb & Gale, for appellant.
Attorney-General Villamor, for appellee.
CARSON, J.:
)he e'i(ence as to *an+ of the essential an( 'ital facts in this case is li*ite( to the testi*on+
of the accuse( hi*self, because fro* the 'er+ nature of these facts an( fro* the
circu*stances surroun(in, the inci(ent upon -hich these procee(in,s rest, no other e'i(ence
as to these facts -as a'ailable either to the prosecution or to the (efense" .e thin/, ho-e'er,
that, ,i'in, the accuse( the benefit of the (oubt as to the -ei,ht of the e'i(ence touchin,
those (etails of the inci(ent as to -hich there can be sai( to be an+ (oubt, the follo-in,
state*ent of the *aterial facts (isclose b+ the recor( *a+ be ta/en to be substantiall+
correct0
The defendant, Ah Chong, was employed as a cook at !cers" #$arters, %o. &',( )ort
*c+inley, ,i-al .ro/ince, and at the same place .asc$al G$alberto, deceased, was employed
as a ho$se boy or m$chacho. !cers" #$arters %o. &'0 as a detached ho$se sit$ates some
12 meters from the nearest b$ilding, and in A$g$st, 3425', was occ$pied solely as an o!cers"
mess or cl$b. %o one slept in the ho$se e6cept the two ser/ants, who 7ointly occ$pied a small
room toward the rear of the b$ilding, the door of which opened $pon a narrow porch r$nning
along the side of the b$ilding, by which comm$nication was had with the other part of the
ho$se. This porch was co/ered by a hea/y growth of /ines for its entire length and height. The
door of the room was not f$rnished with a permanent bolt or lock, and occ$pants, as a
meas$re of sec$rity, had attached a small hook or catch on the inside of the door, and were in
the habit of reinforcing this somewhat insec$re means of fastening the door by placing against
it a chair. 8n the room there was b$t one small window, which, like the door, opened on the
porch. Aside from the door and window, there were no other openings of any kind in the room.
On the ni,ht of Au,ust 11, 192, at about 1 o3cloc/, the (efen(ant, -ho ha( recei'e( for the
ni,ht, -as su((enl+ a-a/ene( b+ so*e tr+in, to force open the (oor of the roo*" 4e sat up in
be( an( calle( out t-ice, 5.ho is there67 4e hear( no ans-er an( -as con'ince( b+ the noise
at the (oor that it -as bein, pushe( open b+ so*eone bent upon forcin, his -a+ into the
roo*" Due to the hea'+ ,ro-th of 'ines alon, the front of the porch, the roo* -as 'er+ (ar/,
an( the (efen(ant, fearin, that the intru(er -as a robber or a thief, leape( to his feet an(
calle( out" 5If +ou enter the roo*, I -ill /ill +ou"7 At that *o*ent he -as struc/ 8ust abo'e the
/nee b+ the e(,e of the chair -hich ha( been place( a,ainst the (oor" In the (ar/ness an(
confusion the (efen(ant thou,ht that the blo- ha( been inflicte( b+ the person -ho ha(
force( the (oor open, -ho* he suppose( to be a bur,lar, thou,h in the li,ht of after e'ents, it
is probable that the chair -as *erel+ thro-n bac/ into the roo* b+ the su((en openin, of the
(oor a,ainst -hich it reste(" Sei9in, a co**on /itchen /nife -hich he /ept un(er his pillo-,
the (efen(ant struc/ out -il(l+ at the intru(er -ho, it after-ar(s turne( out, -as his
roo**ate, Pascual" Pascual ran out upon the porch an( fell (o-n on the steps in a
(esperatel+ -oun(e( con(ition, follo-e( b+ the (efen(ant, -ho i**e(iatel+ reco,ni9e( hi* in
the *oonli,ht" Seein, that Pascual -as -oun(e(, he calle( to his e*plo+ers -ho slept in the
ne:t house, No" $2, an( ran bac/ to his roo* to secure ban(a,es to bin( up Pascual3s -oun(s"
)here ha( been se'eral robberies in ;ort Mc<inle+ not lon, prior to the (ate of the inci(ent
8ust (escribe(, one of -hich too/ place in a house in -hich the (efen(ant -as e*plo+e( as
coo/= an( as (efen(ant alle,es, it -as because of these repeate( robberies he /ept a /nife
un(er his pillo- for his personal protection"
)he (ecease( an( the accuse(, -ho roo*e( to,ether an( -ho appear to ha'e on frien(l+ an(
a*icable ter*s prior to the fatal inci(ent, ha( an un(erstan(in, that -hen either returne( at
ni,ht, he shoul( /noc/ at the (oor an( ac>uaint his co*panion -ith his i(entit+" Pascual ha(
left the house earl+ in the e'enin, an( ,one for a -al/ -ith his frien(s, Celestino ?uia*bao
an( Mariano Iba@e9, ser'ants e*plo+e( at officers3 >uarters No" $2, the nearest house to the
*ess hall" )he three returne( fro* their -al/ at about 1 o3cloc/, an( Celestino an( Mariano
stoppe( at their roo* at No" $2, Pascual ,oin, on to his roo* at No" $%" A fe- *o*ents after
the part+ separate(, Celestino an( Mariano hear( cries for assistance an( upon returnin, to
No" $% foun( Pascual sittin, on the bac/ steps fatall+ -oun(e( in the sto*ach, -hereupon one
of the* ran bac/ to No" $2 an( calle( Aieutenants Bacobs an( 4eal+, -ho i**e(iatel+ -ent to
the ai( of the -oun(e( *an"
)he (efen(ant then an( there a(*itte( that he ha( stabbe( his roo**ate, but sai( that he
(i( it un(er the i*pression that Pascual -as 5a ladron7 because he force( open the (oor of
their sleepin, roo*, (espite (efen(ant3s -arnin,s"
No reasonable e:planation of the re*ar/able con(uct on the part of Pascual su,,ests itself,
unless it be that the bo+ in a spirit of *ischief -as pla+in, a tric/ on his Chinese roo**ate,
an( sou,ht to fri,htene( hi* b+ forcin, his -a+ into the roo*, refusin, to ,i'e his na*e or
sa+ -ho he -as, in or(er to *a/e Ah Chon, belie'e that he -as bein, attac/e( b+ a robber"
Defen(ant -as place( un(er arrest forth-ith, an( Pascual -as con'e+e( to the *ilitar+
hospital, -here he (ie( fro* the effects of the -oun( on the follo-in, (a+"
)he (efen(ant -as char,e( -ith the cri*e of assassination, trie(, an( foun( ,uilt+ b+ the trial
court of si*ple ho*ici(e, -ith e:tenuatin, circu*stances, an( sentence( to si: +ears an( one
(a+ presidio mayor, the *ini*u* penalt+ prescribe( b+ la-"
At the trial in the court belo- the (efen(ant a(*itte( that he /ille( his roo**ate, Pascual
!ualberto, but insiste( that he struc/ the fatal blo- -ithout an+ intent to (o a -ron,ful act, in
the e:ercise of his la-ful ri,ht of self&(efense"
Article 2 of the Penal Co(e pro'i(es that &
The following are not delin#$ent and are therefore e6empt from criminal liability9
666 666 666
1. :e who acts in defense of his person or rights, pro/ided there are the following attendant
circ$mstances9
;3< 8llegal aggression.
;&< ,easonable necessity of the means employed to pre/ent or repel it.
;=< >ack of s$!cient pro/ocation on the part of the person defending himself.
Cn(er these pro'isions -e thin/ that there can be no (oubt that (efen(ant -oul( be entitle to
co*plete e:ception fro* cri*inal liabilit+ for the (eath of the 'icti* of his fatal blo-, if the
intru(er -ho force( open the (oor of his roo* ha( been in fact a (an,erous thief or 5ladron,7
as the (efen(ant belie'e( hi* to be" No one, un(er such circu*stances, -oul( (oubt the ri,ht
of the (efen(ant to resist an( repel such an intrusion, an( the thief ha'in, force( open the
(oor not-ithstan(in, (efen(ant3s thrice&repeate( -arnin, to (esist, an( his threat that he
-oul( /ill the intru(er if he persiste( in his atte*pt, it -ill not be >uestione( that in the
(ar/ness of the ni,ht, in a s*all roo*, -ith no *eans of escape, -ith the thief a('ancin,
upon hi* (espite his -arnin,s (efen(ant -oul( ha'e been -holl+ 8ustifie( in usin, an+
a'ailable -eapon to (efen( hi*self fro* such an assault, an( in stri/in, pro*ptl+, -ithout
-aitin, for the thief to (isco'er his -hereabouts an( (eli'er the first blo-"
But the e'i(ence clearl+ (iscloses that the intru(er -as not a thief or a 5ladron"7 )hat neither
the (efen(ant nor his propert+ nor an+ of the propert+ un(er his char,e -as in real (an,er at
the ti*e -hen he struc/ the fatal blo-" )hat there -as no such 5unla-ful a,,ression7 on the
part of a thief or 5ladron7 as (efen(ant belie'e( he -as repellin, an( resistin,, an( that there
-as no real 5necessit+7 for the use of the /nife to (efen( his person or his propert+ or the
propert+ un(er his char,e"
)he >uestion then s>uarel+ presents it self, -hether in this 8uris(iction one can be hel(
cri*inall+ responsible -ho, b+ reason of a *ista/e as to the facts, (oes an act for -hich he
-oul( be e:e*pt fro* cri*inal liabilit+ if the facts -ere as he suppose( the* to be, but -hich
-oul( constitute the cri*e of ho*ici(e or assassination if the actor ha( /no-n the true state
of the facts at the ti*e -hen he co**itte( the act" )o this >uestion -e thin/ there can be but
one ans-er, an( -e hol( that un(er such circu*stances there is no cri*inal liabilit+, pro'i(e(
al-a+s that the alle,e( i,norance or *ista/e or fact -as not (ue to ne,li,ence or ba( faith"
In broa(er ter*s, i,norance or *ista/e of fact, if such i,norance or *ista/e of fact is sufficient
to ne,ati'e a particular intent -hich un(er the la- is a necessar+ in,re(ient of the offense
char,e( De",", in larcen+, anim$s f$rendi= in *ur(er, *alice= in cri*es, intentE 5cancels the
presu*ption of intent,7 an( -or/s an ac>uittal= e:cept in those cases -here the circu*stances
(e*an( a con'iction un(er the penal pro'isions touchin, cri*inal ne,li,ence= an( in cases
-here, un(er the pro'isions of article 1 of the Penal Co(e one 'oluntaril+ co**ittin, a cri*e
or *is(e*eanor incurs cri*inal liabilit+ for an+ -ron,ful act co**itte( b+ hi*, e'en thou,h it
be (ifferent fro* that -hich he inten(e( to co**it" D.harton3s Cri*inal Aa-, sec" 2% an(
cases cite(= McClain3s Cri*" Aa-, sec" 1FF an( cases cite(= Pettit 's" S", $2 )e:" Ap" $1=
Co**on-ealth 's" Po-er, % Met" #9G= Hates 's" People, F$ N"H" #9= Isha* 's" State, F2 Ala"
$1F= Co**on-ealth 's" Ro,ers, % Met" #"E
)he ,eneral proposition thus state( har(l+ a(*its of (iscussion, an( the onl+ >uestion -orth+
of consi(eration is -hether *alice or cri*inal intent is an essential ele*ent or in,re(ient of
the cri*es of ho*ici(e an( assassination as (efine( an( penali9e( in the Penal Co(e" It has
been sai( that since the (efinitions there ,i'en of these as -ell as *ost other cri*es an(
offense therein (efine(, (o not specificall+ an( e:pressl+ (eclare that the acts constitutin, the
cri*e or offense *ust be co**itte( -ith *alice or -ith cri*inal intent in or(er that the actor
*a+ be hel( cri*inall+ liable, the co**ission of the acts set out in the 'arious (efinitions
sub8ects the actor to the penalties (escribe( therein, unless it appears that he is e:e*pte(
fro* liabilit+ un(er one or other of the e:press pro'isions of article 2 of the co(e, -hich treats
of e:e*ption" But -hile it is true that contrar+ to the ,eneral rule of le,islati'e enact*ent in
the Cnite( States, the (efinitions of cri*es an( offenses as set out in the Penal Co(e rarel+
contain pro'isions e:pressl+ (eclarin, that *alice or cri*inal intent is an essential in,re(ient
of the cri*e, ne'ertheless, the ,eneral pro'isions of article 1 of the co(e clearl+ in(icate that
*alice, or cri*inal intent in so*e for*, is an essential re>uisite of all cri*es an( offense
therein (efine(, in the absence of e:press pro'isions *o(if+in, the ,eneral rule, such as are
those touchin, liabilit+ resultin, fro* acts ne,li,entl+ or i*pru(entl+ co**itte(, an( acts
(one b+ one 'oluntaril+ co**ittin, a cri*e or *is(e*eanor, -here the act co**itte( is
(ifferent fro* that -hich he inten(e( to co**it" An( it is to be obser'e( that e'en these
e:ceptions are *ore apparent than real, for 5)here is little (istinction, e:cept in (e,ree,
bet-een a -ill to (o a -ron,ful thin, an( in(ifference -hether it is (one or not" )herefore
carelessness is cri*inal, an( -ithin li*its supplies the place of the affir*ati'e cri*inal intent7
DBishop3s Ne- Cri*inal Aa-, 'ol" 1, s" F1FE= an(, a,ain, 5)here is so little (ifference bet-een a
(isposition to (o a ,reat har* an( a (isposition to (o har* that one of the* *a+ 'er+ -ell be
loo/e( upon as the *easure of the other" Since, therefore, the ,uilt of a cri*e consists in the
(isposition to (o har*, -hich the cri*inal sho-s b+ co**ittin, it, an( since this (isposition is
,reater or less in proportion to the har* -hich is (one b+ the cri*e, the conse>uence is that
the ,uilt of the cri*e follo-s the sa*e proportion= it is ,reater or less accor(in, as the cri*e
in its o-n nature (oes ,reater or less har*7 DRuth" Ints" C" 12, p" 11E= or, as it has been
other-ise state(, the thin, (one, ha'in, procee(e( fro* a corrupt *i(, is to be 'ie-e( the
sa*e -hether the corruption -as of one particular for* or another"
Article 1 of the Penal Co(e is as follo-s0
Crimes or misdemeanors are /ol$ntary acts and omissions p$nished by law.
Acts and omissions p$nished by law are always pres$med to be /ol$ntarily $nless the contrary
shall appear.
Any person /ol$ntarily committing a crime or misdemeanor shall inc$r criminal liability, e/en
tho$gh the wrongf$l act committed be di?erent from that which he had intended to commit.
)he celebrate( Spanish 8urist Pacheco, (iscussin, the *eanin, of the -or( 5'oluntar+7 as use(
in this article, sa+ that a 'oluntar+ act is a free, intelli,ent, an( intentional act, an( roun(l+
asserts that -ithout intention Dintention to (o -ron, or cri*inal intentionE there can be no
cri*e= an( that the -or( 5'oluntar+7 i*plies an( inclu(es the -or(s 5con malicia,7 -hich -ere
e:pressl+ set out in the (efinition of the -or( 5cri*e7 in the co(e of 12$$, but o*itte( fro*
the co(e of 12%, because, as Pacheco insists, their use in the for*er co(e -as re(un(ant,
bein, i*plie( an( inclu(e( in the -or( 5'oluntar+"7 DPacheco, Co(i,o Penal, 'ol" 1, p" %1"E
Iia(a, -hile insistin, that the absence of intention to co**it the cri*e can onl+ be sai( to
e:e*pt fro* cri*inal responsibilit+ -hen the act -hich -as actuall+ inten(e( to be (one -as
in itself a la-ful one, an( in the absence of ne,li,ence or i*pru(ence, ne'ertheless a(*its
an( reco,ni9es in his (iscussion of the pro'isions of this article of the co(e that in ,eneral
-ithout intention there can be no cri*e" DIia(a, 'ol" 1, p" 1G"E An(, as -e ha'e sho-n abo'e,
the e:ceptions insiste( upon b+ Iia(a are *ore apparent than real"
Sil'ela, in (iscussin, the (octrine herein lai( (o-n, sa+s0
8n fact, it is s$!cient to remember the @rst article, which declared that where there is no
intention there is no crime . . . in order to a!rm, witho$t fear of mistake, that $nder o$r code
there can be no crime if there is no act, an act which m$st fall within the sphere of ethics if
there is no moral in7$ry. ;Vol. &, the Criminal >aw, folio 3A4.<
An( to the sa*e effect are 'arious (ecisions of the supre*e court of Spain, as, for e:a*ple in
its sentence of Ma+ F1, 122$, in -hich it *a(e use of the follo-in, lan,ua,e0
8t is necessary that this act, in order to constit$te a crime, in/ol/e all the malice which is
s$pposed from the operation of the will and an intent to ca$se the in7$ry which may be the
ob7ect of the crime.
An( a,ain in its sentence of March 1G, 129$, -herein it hel( that 5consi(erin, that, -hate'er
*a+ be the ci'il effects of the inscription of his three sons, *a(e b+ the appellant in the ci'il
re,istr+ an( in the parochial church, there can be no cri*e because of the lac/ of the
necessar+ ele*ent or cri*inal intention, -hich characteri9es e'er+ action or o*ission
punishe( b+ la-= nor is he ,uilt+ of cri*inal ne,li,ence"7
An( to the sa*e effect in its sentence of Dece*ber F, 129G, it *a(e use of the follo-in,
lan,ua,e0
. . . Considering that the moral element of the crime, that is, intent or malice or their absence
in the commission of an act de@ned and p$nished by law as criminal, is not a necessary
#$estion of fact s$bmitted to the e6cl$si/e 7$dgment and decision of the trial co$rt.
)hat the author of the Penal Co(e (ee*e( cri*inal intent or *alice to be an essential ele*ent
of the 'arious cri*es an( *is(e*eanors therein (efine( beco*es clear also fro* an
e:a*ination of the pro'isions of article #G2, -hich are as follo-s0
:e who shall e6ec$te thro$gh reckless negligence an act that, if done with malice, wo$ld
constit$te a gra/e crime, shall be p$nished with the penalty of arresto mayor in its ma6im$m
degree, to prision correccional in its minim$m degrees if it shall constit$te a less gra/e crime.
:e who in /iolation of the reg$lations shall commit a crime thro$gh simple impr$dence or
negligence shall inc$r the penalty of arresto mayor in its medi$m and ma6im$m degrees.
8n the application of these penalties the co$rts shall proceed according to their discretion,
witho$t being s$b7ect to the r$les prescribed in article 53.
The pro/isions of this article shall not be applicable if the penalty prescribed for the crime is
e#$al to or less than those contained in the @rst paragraph thereof, in which case the co$rts
shall apply the ne6t one thereto in the degree which they may consider proper.
)he -or( 5*alice7 in this article is *anifestl+ substantiall+ e>ui'alent to the -or(s 5cri*inal
intent,7 an( the (irect inference fro* its pro'isions is that the co**ission of the acts
conte*plate( therein, in the absence of *alice Dcri*inal intentE, ne,li,ence, an( i*pru(ence,
(oes not i*pose an+ cri*inal liabilit+ on the actor"
)he -or( 5'oluntar+7 as use( in article 1 of the Penal Co(e -oul( see* to appro:i*ate in
*eanin, the -or( 5-illful7 as use( in En,lish an( A*erican statute to (esi,nate a for* of
cri*inal intent" It has been sai( that -hile the -or( 5-illful7 so*eti*es *eans little *ore than
intentionall+ or (esi,ne(l+, +et it is *ore fre>uentl+ un(erstoo( to e:tent a little further an(
appro:i*ate the i(ea of the *il(er /in( of le,al *alice= that is, it si,nifies an e'il intent
-ithout 8ustifiable e:cuse" In one case it -as sai( to *ean, as e*plo+e( in a statute in
conte*plation, 5-antonl+7 or 5causelessl+=7 in another, 5-ithout reasonable ,roun(s to belie'e
the thin, la-ful"7 An( Sha-, C" B", once sai( that or(inaril+ in a statute it *eans 5not *erel+
J'oluntaril+3 but -ith a ba( purpose= in other -or(s, corruptl+"7 In En,lish an( the A*erican
statutes (efinin, cri*es 5*alice,7 5*alicious,7 5*aliciousl+,7 an( 5*alice aforethou,ht7 are
-or(s in(icatin, intent, *ore purel+ technical than 5-illful7 or -illfull+,7 but 5the (ifference
bet-een the* is not ,reat=7 the -or( 5*alice7 not often bein, un(erstoo( to re>uire ,eneral
*ale'olence to-ar( a particular in(i'i(ual, an( si,nif+in, rather the intent fro* our le,al
8ustification" DBishop3s Ne- Cri*inal Aa-, 'ol" 1, secs" 1$2 an( 1$9, an( cases cite("E
But e'en in the absence of e:press -or(s in a statute, settin, out a con(ition in the (efinition
of a cri*e that it be co**itte( 5'oluntaril+,7 -illfull+,7 5*aliciousl+7 5-ith *alice
aforethou,ht,7 or in one of the 'arious *o(es ,enerall+ construe( to i*pl+ a cri*inal intent,
-e thin/ that reasonin, fro* ,eneral principles it -ill al-a+s be foun( that -ith the rare
e:ceptions hereinafter *entione(, to constitute a cri*e e'il intent *ust co*bine -ith an act"
Mr" Bishop, -ho supports his position -ith nu*erous citations fro* the (eci(e( cases, thus
forcel+ present this (octrine0
In no one thin, (oes cri*inal 8urispru(ence (iffer *ore fro* ci'il than in the rule as to the
intent" In contro'ersies bet-een pri'ate parties the #$o animo -ith -hich a thin, -as (one is
so*eti*es i*portant, not al-a+s= but cri*e procee(s onl+ fro* a cri*inal *in(" So that &
There can be no crime, large or small, witho$t an e/il mind. 8n other words, p$nishment is the
sentence of wickedness, witho$t which it can not be. And neither in philosophical spec$lation
nor in religio$s or mortal sentiment wo$ld any people in any age allow that a man sho$ld be
deemed g$ilty $nless his mind was so. 8t is therefore a principle of o$r legal system, as
probably it is of e/ery other, that the essence of an o?ense is the wrongf$l intent, witho$t
which it can not e6ists. Be @nd this doctrine con@rmed by -
>egal ma6ims. C The ancient wisdom of the law, e#$ally with the modern, is distinct on this
s$b7ect. 8t conse#$ently has s$pplied to $s s$ch ma6ims as Act$s non facit re$m nisi mens sit
rea, the act itself does not make man g$ilty $nless his intention were soD( Act$s me incito
fact$s non est me$s act$s, an act done by me against my will is not my actD( and others of
the like sort. 8n this, as 7$st said, criminal 7$rispr$dence di?ers from ci/il. Eo also -
*oral science and moral sentiment teach the same thing. Fy reference to the intention, we
inc$lpate or e6c$lpate others or o$rsel/es witho$t any respect to the happiness or misery
act$ally prod$ced. >et the res$lt of an action be what it may, we hold a man g$ilty simply on
the gro$nd of intentionD or, on the dame gro$nd, we hold him innocent.( The calm 7$dgment of
mankind keeps this doctrine among its 7ewels. 8n times of e6citement, when /engeance takes
the place of 7$stice, e/ery g$ard aro$nd the innocent is cast down. F$t with the ret$rn of
reason comes the p$blic /oice that where the mind is p$re, he who di?ers in act from his
neighbors does not o?end. And -
8n the spontaneo$s 7$dgment which springs from the nat$re gi/en by God to man, no one
deems another to deser/e p$nishment for what he did from an $pright mind, destit$te of
e/ery form of e/il. And whene/er a person is made to s$?er a p$nishment which the
comm$nity deems not his d$e, so far from its placing an e/il mark $pon him, it ele/ates him to
the seat of the martyr. G/en infancy itself spontaneo$sly pleads the want of bad intent in
7$sti@cation of what has the appearance of wrong, with the $tmost con@dence that the plea, if
its tr$th is credited, will be accepted as good. %ow these facts are only the /oice of nat$re
$ttering one of her imm$table tr$ths. 8t is, then, the doctrine of the law, s$perior to all other
doctrines, beca$se @rst in nat$re from which the law itself proceeds, that no man is to be
p$nished as a criminal $nless his intent is wrong. ;Fishop"s %ew Criminal >aw, /ol. 3, secs. &5A
to &42.<
Co*pelle( b+ necessit+, 5the ,reat *aster of all thin,s,7 an apparent (eparture fro* this
(octrine of abstract 8ustice result fro* the a(option of the arbitrar+ rule that 8gnorantia 7$ris
non e6c$satD5I,norance of the la- e:cuses no *an7E, -ithout -hich 8ustice coul( not be
a(*inistere( in our tribunals= an( co*pelle( also b+ the sa*e (octrine of necessit+, the courts
ha'e reco,ni9e( the po-er of the le,islature to forbi(, in a li*ite( class of cases, the (oin, of
certain acts, an( to *a/e their co**ission cri*inal -ithout re,ar( to the intent of the (oer"
.ithout (iscussin, these e:ceptional cases at len,th, it is sufficient here to sa+ that the courts
ha'e al-a+s hel( that unless the intention of the la-*a/er to *a/e the co**ission of certain
acts cri*inal -ithout re,ar( to the intent of the (oer is clear an( be+on( >uestion the statute
-ill not be so construe( Dcases cite( in C+c", 'ol" 1$, p" 1#2, notes %G an( %%E= an( the rule
that i,norance of the la- e:cuses no *an has been sai( not to be a real (eparture fro* the
la-3s fun(a*ental principle that cri*e e:ists onl+ -here the *in( is at fault, because 5the e'il
purpose nee( not be to brea/ the la-, an( if suffices if it is si*pl+ to (o the thin, -hich the
la- in fact forbi(s"7 DBishop3s Ne- Cri*inal Aa-, sec" F, an( cases cite("E
But, ho-e'er this *a+ be, there is no technical rule, an( no pressin, necessit+ therefore,
re>uirin, *ista/e in fact to be (ealt -ith other-ise that in strict accor( -ith the principles of
abstract 8ustice" On the contrar+, the *a:i* here is 8gnorantia facti e6c$sat D5I,norance or
*ista/e in point of fact is, in all cases of suppose( offense, a sufficient e:cuse7E" DBro-n3s Ae,"
Ma:", $( e(", 19"E
Since e'il intent is in ,eneral an inseparable ele*ent in e'er+ cri*e, an+ such *ista/e of fact
as sho-s the act co**itte( to ha'e procee(e( fro* no sort of e'il in the *in( necessaril+
relie'es the actor fro* cri*inal liabilit+ pro'i(e( al-a+s there is no fault or ne,li,ence on his
part= an( as lai( (o-n b+ Baron Par/e, 5)he ,uilt of the accuse( *ust (epen( on the
circu*stances as the+ appear to hi*"7 DRe," 's" )hurborn, 1 Den" C" F2%= P" 's" An(erson, 11
Cal" G#= P" 's" Aa*b, #1 Barb" F1$= Hates 's" P", F$ N"H" #9= Patterson 's" P", 1G Barb" G$#=
Re," 's" Cohen, 2 Co: C"C" 11= P" 's" Miles, ## Cal" $%, $9= Nalle+ 's" S", $2 )e:" Ap" F2%"E
)hat is to sa+, the >uestion as to -hether he honestl+, in ,oo( faith, an( -ithout fault or
ne,li,ence fell into the *ista/e is to be (eter*ine( b+ the circu*stances as the+ appeare( to
hi* at the ti*e -hen the *ista/e -as *a(e, an( the effect -hich the surroun(in,
circu*stances *i,ht reasonabl+ be e:pecte( to ha'e on his *in(, in for*in, the intent,
cri*inal or other -ise, upon -hich he acte("
If, in lan,ua,e not unco**on in the cases, one has reasonable ca$se to belie/e the e:istence
of facts -hich -ill 8ustif+ a /illin, K or, in ter*s *ore nicel+ in accor( -ith the principles on
-hich the rule is foun(e(, if -ithout fault or carelessness he (oes belie'e the* K he is le,all+
,uiltless of the ho*ici(e= thou,h he *istoo/ the facts, an( so the life of an innocent person is
unfortunatel+ e:tin,uishe(" In other -or(s, an( -ith reference to the ri,ht of self&(efense an(
the not >uite har*onious authorities, it is the (octrine of reason an( sufficientl+ sustaine( in
a(8u(ication, that not-ithstan(in, so*e (ecisions apparentl+ a('erse, -hene'er a *an
un(erta/es self&(efense, he is 8ustifie( in actin, on the facts as the+ appear to hi*" If, -ithout
fault or carelessness, he is *isle( concernin, the*, an( (efen(s hi*self correctl+ accor(in, to
-hat he thus supposes the facts to be the la- -ill not punish hi* thou,h the+ are in truth
other-ise, an( he -as reall+ no occasion for the e:tre*e *easures" DBishop3s Ne- Cri*inal
Aa-, sec" F#, an( lar,e arra+ of cases there cite("E
)he co**on illustration in the A*erican an( En,lish te:tboo/s of the application of this rule is
the case -here a *an, *as/e( an( (is,uise( as a footpa(, at ni,ht an( on a lonel+ roa(,
5hol(s up7 his frien(s in a spirit of *ischief, an( -ith le'ele( pistol (e*an(s his *one+ or his
life, but is /ille( b+ his frien( un(er the *ista/en belief that the attac/ is a real one, that the
pistol le'ele( at his hea( is loa(e(, an( that his life an( propert+ are in i**inent (an,er at
the han(s of the a,,ressor" No one -ill (oubt that if the facts -ere such as the sla+er belie'e(
the* to be he -oul( be innocent of the co**ission of an+ cri*e an( -holl+ e:e*pt fro*
cri*inal liabilit+, althou,h if he /ne- the real state of the facts -hen he too/ the life of his
frien( he -oul( un(oubte(l+ be ,uilt+ of the cri*e of ho*ici(e or assassination" Cn(er such
circu*stances, proof of his innocent *ista/e of the facts o'erco*es the presu*ption of *alice
or cri*inal intent, an( Dsince *alice or cri*inal intent is a necessar+ in,re(ient of the 5act
punishe( b+ la-7 in cases of ho*ici(e or assassinationE o'erco*es at the sa*e ti*e the
presu*ption establishe( in article 1 of the co(e, that the 5act p$nished by law7 -as co**itte(
5'oluntaril+"7
Parson, C"B", in the Massachusetts court, once sai(0
8f the party killing had reasonable gro$nds for belie/ing that the person slain had a felonio$s
design against him, and $nder that s$pposition killed him, altho$gh it sho$ld afterwards
appear that there was no s$ch design, it will not be m$rder, b$t it will be either mansla$ghter
or e6c$sable homicide, according to the degree of ca$tion $sed and the probable gro$nds of
s$ch belief. ;Charge to the grand 7$ry in Eelfridge"s case, Bhart, :om., 13', 135, >loyd"s report
of the case, p.'.<
In this case, Par/er, B", char,in, the petit 7$ry, enforce( the (octrine as follo-s0
A, in the peaceable pursuit of his affairs, sees B rushin, rapi(l+ to-ar( hi*, -ith an
outstretche( ar*s an( a pistol in his han(, an( usin, 'iolent *enaces a,ainst his life as he
a('ances" 4a'in, approache( near enou,h in the sa*e attitu(e, A, -ho has a club in his
han(, stri/es B o'er the hea( before or at the instant the pistol is (ischar,e(= an( of the
-oun( B (ies" It turns out the pistol -as loa(e( -ith powder onl+, an( that the real (esi,n of
B -as onl+ to terrify A" .ill an+ reasonable *an sa+ that A is *ore cri*inal that he -oul(
ha'e been if there ha( been a bullet in the pistol6 )hose -ho hol( such (octrine *ust re>uire
that a *an so attac/e( *ust, before he stri/es the assailant, stop an( ascertain ho- the pistol
is loa(e( K a (octrine -hich -oul( entirel+ ta/e a-a+ the essential ri,ht of self&(efense" An(
-hen it is consi(ere( that the 8ur+ -ho tr+ the cause, an( not the part+ /illin,, are to 8u(,e of
the reasonable ,roun(s of his apprehension, no (an,er can be suppose( to flo- fro* this
principle" DAlo+(3s Rep", p" 1G"E
)o the sa*e effect are 'arious (ecisions of the supre*e court of Spain, cite( b+ Iia(a, a fe-
of -hich are here set out in full because the facts are so*e-hat analo,ous to those in the
case at bar"
HIGET8% 888. Bhen it is shown that the acc$sed was sitting at his hearth, at night, in company
only of his wife, witho$t other light than reJected from the @re, and that the man with his back
to the door was attending to the @re, there s$ddenly entered a person whom he did not see or
know, who str$ck him one or two blows, prod$cing a cont$sion on the sho$lder, beca$se of
which he t$rned, sei-ed the person and took from his the stick with which he had $ndo$btedly
been str$ck, and ga/e the $nknown person a blow, knocking him to the Joor, and afterwards
striking him another blow on the head, lea/ing the $nknown lying on the Joor, and left the
ho$se. 8t t$rned o$t the $nknown person was his father-in-law, to whom he rendered
assistance as soon as he learned his identity, and who died in abo$t si6 days in conse#$ence
of cerebral congestion res$lting from the blow. The acc$sed, who confessed the facts, had
always s$stained pleasant relations with his father-in-law, whom he /isited d$ring his sickness,
demonstrating great grief o/er the occ$rrence. Ehall he be considered free from criminal
responsibility, as ha/ing acted in self-defense, with all the circ$mstances related in paragraph
1, article 5, of the .enal CodeK The criminal branch of theA$diencia of Valladolid fo$nd that he
was an illegal aggressor, witho$t s$!cient pro/ocation, and that there did not e6ists rational
necessity for the employment of the force $sed, and in accordance with articles 134 and 5' of
the .enal Code condemned him to twenty months of imprisonment, with accessory penalty
and costs. Ipon appeal by the acc$sed, he was ac#$itted by the s$preme co$rt, $nder the
following sentence9 Considering, from the facts fo$nd by the sentence to ha/e been pro/en,
that the acc$sed was s$rprised from behind, at night, in his ho$se beside his wife who was
n$rsing her child, was attacked, str$ck, and beaten, witho$t being able to disting$ish with
which they might ha/e e6ec$ted their criminal intent, beca$se of the there was no other than
@re light in the room, and considering that in s$ch a sit$ation and when the acts e6ec$ted
demonstrated that they might endanger his e6istence, and possibly that of his wife and child,
more especially beca$se his assailant was $nknown, he sho$ld ha/e defended himself, and in
doing so with the same stick with which he was attacked, he did not e6ceed the limits of self-
defense, nor did he $se means which were not rationally necessary, partic$larly beca$se the
instr$ment with which he killed was the one which he took from his assailant, and was capable
of prod$cing death, and in the darkness of the ho$se and the consteration which nat$rally
res$lted from s$ch strong aggression, it was not gi/en him to known or disting$ish whether
there was one or more assailants, nor the arms which they might bear, not that which they
might accomplish, and considering that the lower co$rt did not @nd from the accepted facts
that there e6isted rational necessity for the means employed, and that it did not apply
paragraph 1 of article 5 of the .enal Code, it erred, etc.( ;Eentence of s$preme co$rt of Epain,
)ebr$ary &5, 35'A.< ;Viada, Vol. 8, p. &AA.< .
HIGET8% L8L. A person ret$rning, at night, to his ho$se, which was sit$ated in a retired part
of the city, $pon arri/ing at a point where there was no light, heard the /oice of a man, at a
distance of some 5 paces, saying9 )ace down, hand o/er yo$ moneyM( beca$se of which, and
almost at the same money, he @red two shots from his pistol, disting$ishing immediately the
/oice of one of his friends ;who had before sim$lated a di?erent /oice< saying, hM they ha/e
killed me,( and hastening to his assistance, @nding the body lying $pon the gro$nd, he cried,
*ig$el, *ig$el, speak, for God"s sake, or 8 am r$ined,( reali-ing that he had been the /ictim of
a 7oke, and not recei/ing a reply, and obser/ing that his friend was a corpse, he retired from
the place. Ehall he be declared e6empt in totofrom responsibility as the a$thor of this
homicide, as ha/ing acted in 7$st self-defense $nder the circ$mstances de@ned in paragraph 1,
article 5, .enal CodeK The criminal branch of the A$diencia of *alaga did not so @nd, b$t only
fo$nd in fa/or of the acc$sed two of the re#$isites of said article, b$t not that of the
reasonableness of the means employed to repel the attack, and, therefore, condemned the
acc$sed to eight years and one day of prision mayor, etc. The s$preme co$rt ac#$itted the
acc$sed on his appeal from this sentence, holding that the acc$sed was acting $nder a
7$sti@able and e6c$sable mistake of fact as to the identity of the person calling to him, and
that $nder the circ$mstances, the darkness and remoteness, etc., the means employed were
rational and the shooting 7$sti@able. ;Eentence s$preme co$rt, *arch 3', 355N.< ;Viada, Vol. 8,
p. 3=A.<
HIGET8% V8. The owner of a mill, sit$ated in a remote spot, is awakened, at night, by a large
stone thrown against his window C at this, he p$ts his head o$t of the window and in#$ires
what is wanted, and is answered the deli/ery of all of his money, otherwise his ho$se wo$ld
be b$rned( C beca$se of which, and obser/ing in an alley ad7acent to the mill fo$r indi/id$als,
one of whom addressed him with blasphemy, he @red his pistol at one the men, who, on the
ne6t morning was fo$nd dead on the same spot. Ehall this man be declared e6empt from
criminal responsibility as ha/ing acted in 7$st self-defense with all of the re#$isites of lawK The
criminal branch of theA$diencia of Oarago-a @nds that there e6isted in fa/or of the acc$sed a
ma7ority of the re#$isites to e6empt him from criminal responsibility, b$t not that of
reasonable necessity for the means, employed, and condemned the acc$sed to twel/e months
of prision correctional for the homicide committed. Ipon appeal, the s$preme co$rt ac#$itted
the condemned, @nding that the acc$sed, in @ring at the malefactors, who attack his mill at
night in a remote spot by threatening robbery and incendiarism, was acting in 7$st self-defense
of his person, property, and family. ;Eentence of *ay &=, 35''<. ;8 Viada, p. 3&5.<
A careful e:a*ination of the facts as (isclose( in the case at bar con'inces us that the
(efen(ant China*an struc/ the fatal blo- alle,e( in the infor*ation in the fir* belief that the
intru(er -ho force( open the (oor of his sleepin, roo* -as a thief, fro* -hose assault he -as
in i**inent peril, both of his life an( of his propert+ an( of the propert+ co**itte( to his
char,e= that in 'ie- of all the circu*stances, as the+ *ust ha'e presente( the*sel'es to the
(efen(ant at the ti*e, he acte( in ,oo( faith, -ithout *alice, or cri*inal intent, in the belief
that he -as (oin, no *ore than e:ercisin, his le,iti*ate ri,ht of self&(efense= that ha( the
facts been as he belie'e( the* to be he -oul( ha'e been -holl+ e:e*pt fro* cri*inal liabilit+
on account of his act= an( that he can not be sai( to ha'e been ,uilt+ of ne,li,ence or
rec/lessness or e'en carelessness in fallin, into his *ista/e as to the facts, or in the *eans
a(opte( b+ hi* to (efen( hi*self fro* the i**inent (an,er -hich he belie'e threatene( his
person an( his propert+ an( the propert+ un(er his char,e"
)he 8u(,*ent of con'iction an( the sentence i*pose( b+ the trial court shoul( be re'erse(,
an( the (efen(ant ac>uitte( of the cri*e -ith -hich he is char,e( an( his bail bon(
e:onerate(, -ith the costs of both instance de o@cio" So or(ere("
US vs Ah Chong
THE UNITED STATES, plaintif and appellee, vs AH CHONG,
defendant and appellant.
Nature: Appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal
Date: March 19, 1910
Ponente: Carson, J.
Facts:
Ah Chong, defendant, was employed as cook and deceased
Pascual Gualberto as house boy at Ofcers quarters No. 27.
Ah Chong and Pascual share the same room (Ofcers quarter No.
27), which is situated some 40 meters away from the nearest building.
No one slept there except the two of them.
One night, at about 10pm, the defendant was awakened by
someone trying to force the door open. He asked who it was but the
other didnt answer.
Fearing that the other person was a robber, Ah Chong threatened
him that if he enters the room, he will kill him.
He was struck above the knee by the edge of the chair that has
been placed against the door. Convinced that the other person, whom
he thought was a burglar, was still forcing his way in, he struck the
intruder with a kitchen knife he was keeping under his pillow.
Recognizing his roommate, who he has friendly relations with, he
called for help to his employers at the next building. He also got
bandages to bind up Pascuals wounds.
He kept a knife to defend himself. There had been several
robberies around the area not long prior to the date of the event.
Ah Chong and Pascual had an agreement that when either
returned at night, he should knock at the door and acquaint the other
with his identity.
Pascual went out for a walk with his two other friends that night.
They returned at about 10pm and assisted the victim when they
heard cries for help.
The defendant admitted of stabbing his roommate, but said he did
it under the impression that the other was a thief. Defendant claimed
that the act was done in self-defense.
Defendant was arrested and trial court found him guilty of simple
homicide.
Issue: Whether or not defendant can be acquitted on the ground of self-
defense.
Held: No. Defendant is acquitted.
Ratio: The general rule is intent/malice is an essential element in a
crime. In the absence of express provisions modifying the general rule
(i.e., negligence), an act without malice is not punishable.
Whenever a man takes self-defense, he is justifed in acting on the facts
as they appear to him. If he defends himself according to what he
supposes the facts to be, the law will not punish him though the facts
that the person believes to be true are otherwise

You might also like