FACTS:

Antonio Oanis and Alberto Galanta were instructed to arrest a notorious criminal and escaped convict,
Anselmo Balagtas, and if overpowered, to get him dead or alive. They went to the suspected house then
proceeded to the room where they saw the supposedly Balagtas sleeping with his back towards the
door sleeping next to his paramour. Oanis and Galanta simultaneously or successively fired at him which
resulted to the victims death. The supposedly Balagtas turned out to be Serepio Tecson, an innocent
man. They had other testimonies that they said if you are Balagtas, stand up and the man tried to
stand up and so he shot him. The other one testified that he was still lying down when they shot him.

ISSUE:

1. WON Oanis and Galanta incur no liability due to innocent mistake of fact in the honest performance
of their official duties.

2. WON Oanis and Galanta incur mitigating circumstance for duty under article 11, No. 5, of the Revised
Penal Code?

HELD:

They are guilty of murder. The crime committed by appellants is not merely criminal negligence or
reckless imprudence, the killing being intentional and not accidental. In criminal negligence, the injury
caused to another should be unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act performed
without malice.

No. Innocent mistake of fact does not apply to the case at bar. Ignorance facti excusat applies only
when the mistake is committed without fault or carelessness. The fact that the supposedly suspect was
sleeping, Oanis and Galanta could have checked whether it is the real Balagtas. The man Tecson was also
unarmed at the time. Their instruction was not to kill him on sight, but to arrest him. And only kill if he
resists with violence.

Notoriety rightly supplies a basis for redoubled official alertness and vigilance; it never can justify
precipitate action at the cost of human life

2. No. A person incurs no criminal liability when he acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful
exercise of a right or office. There are 2 requisites to justify this: (1) the offender acted in the
performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office, (2) that the injury or offense
committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance of such duty or the lawful exercise of
such right or office. They only met the first requites. As for the 2nd, their mandate was to arrest and not
to kill instantly, they exceeded their duty by killing immediately. Thus, there is 1 to 2 degrees lower to
their penalty.