People v Rodil (1981) case digest

G.R. No. L-35156               November 20, 1981

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.

FLORO RODIL defendant-appellant.

MAKASIAR, J.:

FACTS:

Accused Floro Rodil was found guilty for the death of Lt. Guillermo Masana of the Philippine Constabulary. The accused, armed with a double-bladed dagger, with evident premeditation and treachery, and with intent to kill, did, attack and stab PC Lt. Guillermo Masana while the latter was in the performance of his official duties, which directly caused his death.

ISSUE: 

Whether or not the crime of murder can be complexed with assault upon agent of authority.

HELD:

Yes. The Solicitor General claims the crime committed was murder because "it was established by the prosecution that during the stabbing incident, appellant suddenly and without giving the victim a chance to defend himself, stabbed the latter several times with a dagger, inflicting. The suddenness of the attack does not by itself suffice to support a finding of treachery , the record failed to show that the accused made any preparation to kill his victim so as to insure the commission of the crime. Clearly, therefore, the impelling motive for the attack by appellant on his victim was the latter's performance of official duty, which the former resented. This kind of evidence does not clearly show the presence of treachery in the commission of the crime.

The aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank should be appreciated because it is obvious that the victim. Identified himself as a PC officer to the accused who is merely a member of the Anti-Smuggling Unit and therefore inferior both in rank and social status to the victim. If the accused herein were charged with the complex crime of murder with assault against an agent of a person in authority, and not merely murder, then the aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank or contempt of or insult to public authority cannot be appreciated as aggravating because either circumstance is inherent in the charge of assault against a person in authority or an agent of a person in authority. 

But in the case at bar, the appellant is accused of murder only. Consequently, either aggravating circumstance should be considered in the imposition of the penalty. Appellant guilty of HOMICIDE AGGRAVATED BY CONTEMPT FOR OR INSULT TO A PUBLIC AUTHORITY OR DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS RANK.