THE UNITED STATES VS. CECILIO TAEDO, G.R. NO.

5418, FEBRUARY 12,

1910
FACTS:
Cecilio Tanedo, a landowner, went with some workers to work on the dam on his
land, carrying with him his shotgun & a few shells. Upon reaching the dam, the
accused went on his way to hunt for wild chickens, meeting the victim, Feliciano
Sanchez. The accused went into the forest upon the recommendation of the
deceased to continue his search for the elusive wild chickens. Upon seeing one,
Tanedo shot one, but simultaneously, he heard a human cry out in pain.
Consequently, after seeing that Sanchez was wounded, Tanedo ran back to his
workers and asked one, Bernardino Tagampa, to help him hide the body, which they
did by putting it amidst the tall cogon grass, and later burying in an old well.
ISSUE:
Is the accused guilty?
RULING:
No, the idea that Tanedo intended to kill Sanchez is negated by the fact that the
chicken and the man were shot at the same time, there having only one shot fired.
RATIO DECIDENDI:
In this case there is no evidence of negligence on the part of the accused, nor is it
disputed that the accused was engaged in a legal act, nor is there evidence that the
accused intended to kill the deceased. The only thing suspicious is his denial of the
act and his concealment of the body.
Where accidental killing is relied upon as a defense, the accused is not required to
prove such a defense by a preponderance of the evidence, because there is a denial
of intentional killing, and the burden is upon the state to show that it was
intentional, and if, from a consideration of all the evidence, both that for the state
and the prisoner, there is a reasonable doubt as to whether or not the killing was
accidental or intentional, the jury should acquit. Hence, the court held that the
evidence was insufficient to support the judgment of conviction.