1. People vs.

Tomotorgo

FACTS:

- Tomotorgo doesn't want to accept his wife's request to sell their home and to transfer to the
house of his in-laws.

- He saw his wife leaving with their infant son and with bundle of clothes 200 m away from their
home.

- He pleaded with his wife to return home with their child but she refused.

- He tried to take the child from her but the wife threw the child on the grass.

- He became angry with the wife's action so he grabbed a piece of wood to hot his wife.

- He realized that he had hurt his wife severely so he brought her home with his child.

- The wife eventually died despite his efforts to alleviate her pain.

- He reported the incident, surrendered, and pleaded guilty.

- The court found him guilty of paricide but with three mitigating circumstances - viluntart
surrender, plea of guilty, and acting upon an impulse.

- He was given the punishment of reclusion perpetua but he claims that the court handed him
wrong punishment based from article 49 of RPC which prescribes the applicable penalty when the crime
committed is different from what was intended.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the accused is guilty of paricide.

RULING:

Yes. The accused is guilty of parricide. According to article 4 of RPC, criminal liability shall be
incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act be different from that which he
intended and that the accused is liable for all the consequences of his felonious act.
2. US vs. Rodriguez

FACTS:

- Rosalino Rodriguez was charged with homicide because of killing Marciano Magno through
punching the latter.

- He was sentenced to 12 years and one day of reclusion temporal and an indemnity of P1,000
pesos.

- He complans that he punched Maciano because he saw the latter unchastely catch hold of his
daughter's hand because he is trying to make love to her daughter. This was proven.

- A blow, with a fist or a kick, though causing no external wound, may very well produce
inflammation of the spleen and peritonitis - based on the autopsy - and caused of death; and although
the assaulted party was previously affected by some internal malady, if, because of a blow given, his
death was hastened.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the court should lessen the punishment of the defendant due to the cause of
punching Marciano,

RULING:

Yes. Because the defendant did not intend to cause so.grave an.injury. The court lessened the
punishment to prison mayor based on rule 5 of article 81 of Penal Code.
3. US vs. Marasigan

FACTS:

- Marasigan and his wife asked Francisco Mendoza to make the divide of their lands straight.

- Mendoza refused because dividing the line straight can put certain logs and trees on
Marasigan's land.

- Marasigan argued that the logs' purpose was to mark his land.

- Mendoza questioned Marasigan's lack of satisfaction with the divide.

- Marasigan then drew his knife and struck at Mendoza.

- This resulted to an injury of Mendoza's finger. The finger was rendered useless.

- The appelant filed a motion for a new trial hoping that a surgical operation would make
Mendoza's finger useful again.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the court should accept the motion for new trial.

RULING:

No. A person injured in an assault is not obliged to submit to a surgical operation to relieve the
accused from the results of the crime. The voluntary act of Marasigan caused the disability of Mendoza
so Marasigan should abide from the consequences of his act without the aid from Mendoza. Thus, the
court's decision in denying the motion for new trial is affirmed.

'