Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • TITLE: U.S. v. Ah Chong FACTS: Ah Chong Worked As A Cook at The "Officers' Quarters No. 27, Fort MC Kinley, Rizal

    Uploaded by

    hukai_09
    13 views1 page
    Ah Chong worked as a cook in a detached house used as officers' quarters in Iloilo Province. In the middle of the night, someone tried to force open the door to Ah Chong's sleeping room, where he and another man slept. Out of fear, Ah Chong shouted warnings and then wounded the intruder, who turned out to be the other man sleeping there. The Supreme Court held that Ah Chong should be exempt from criminal liability because he struck the blow in the firm belief that the intruder forcing open his door in the night was a thief threatening him, his property, and the property under his charge, and that under the circumstances he acted in good faith and self-defense.

    Original Description:

    DIGESTED CASE

    Original Title

    1. US v. Ah Chong

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Ah Chong worked as a cook in a detached house used as officers' quarters in Iloilo Province. In the middle of the night, someone tried to force open the door to Ah Chong's sleeping room, where he and another man slept. Out of fear, Ah Chong shouted warnings and then wounded the intruder, who turned out to be the other man sleeping there. The Supreme Court held that Ah Chong should be exempt from criminal liability because he struck the blow in the firm belief that the intruder forcing open his door in the night was a thief threatening him, his property, and the property under his charge, and that under the circumstances he acted in good faith and self-defense.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    13 views1 page

    TITLE: U.S. v. Ah Chong FACTS: Ah Chong Worked As A Cook at The "Officers' Quarters No. 27, Fort MC Kinley, Rizal

    Uploaded by

    hukai_09
    Ah Chong worked as a cook in a detached house used as officers' quarters in Iloilo Province. In the middle of the night, someone tried to force open the door to Ah Chong's sleeping room, where he and another man slept. Out of fear, Ah Chong shouted warnings and then wounded the intruder, who turned out to be the other man sleeping there. The Supreme Court held that Ah Chong should be exempt from criminal liability because he struck the blow in the firm belief that the intruder forcing open his door in the night was a thief threatening him, his property, and the property under his charge, and that under the circumstances he acted in good faith and self-defense.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    TITLE: U.S. v.

    Ah Chong
    FACTS: Ah Chong worked as a cook at the Officers quarters No. 27, ort !c "in#e$, %i&a#
    'rovince.( )he said *#ace was a detached house around +, -eters awa$ fro- the nearest
    .ui#ding. /t a#so served as the officers -ess( roo-. On#$ Ah Chong and 'ascua# 0ua#.erto, a
    -uchacho s#e*t in that *#ace. /t was not furnished with a *er-anent #ock. O August 1+, 12,3,
    around 1,4o c#ock in the evening, Ah Chong was sudden#$ awakened .ecause so-eone had
    .een tr$ing to o*en the roo-. Out of fear, he shouted who is there( .ut none re*#ied. /nstead,
    the other *erson ke*t on forcing his entr$. Ah Chong .e#ieved that it was a thief, and shouted
    again if $ou enter, / wi## ki## $ou5( Again none re*#ied. U*on entr$ and out of fear Ah Chong
    inf#icted a wound. 6hen he rea#i&ed, that *erson was 0ua#.erto. 7e i--ediate#$ ca##ed his
    e-*#o$ers and dressed 'ascua#s wound.
    ISSUE: 6hether or not shou#d Ah Chong shou#d .e e8e-*t fro- cri-ina# #ia.i#it$9
    HELD: :;S. )he Su*re-e Court he#d that
    A carefu# e8a-ination of the facts as disc#osed in the case at .ar convinces us that the
    defendant China-an struck the fata# .#ow a##eged in the infor-ation in the fir- .e#ief that the
    intruder who forced o*en the door of his s#ee*ing roo- was a thief, fro- whose assau#t he was
    in i--inent *eri#, .oth of his #ife and of his *ro*ert$ and of the *ro*ert$ co--itted to his
    charge< that in view of a## the circu-stances, as the$ -ust have *resented the-se#ves to the
    defendant at the ti-e, he acted in good faith, without -a#ice, or cri-ina# intent, in the .e#ief
    that he was doing no -ore than e8ercising his #egiti-ate right of se#f=defense< that had the facts
    .een as he .e#ieved the- to .e he wou#d have .een who##$ e8e-*t fro- cri-ina# #ia.i#it$ on
    account of his act< and that he can not .e said to have .een gui#t$ of neg#igence or reck#essness
    or even care#essness in fa##ing into his -istake as to the facts, or in the -eans ado*ted .$ hi-
    to defend hi-se#f fro- the i--inent danger which he .e#ieve threatened his *erson and his
    *ro*ert$ and the *ro*ert$ under his charge.(
    1

    You might also like