Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Supreme Court
Manila
EN BANC
CORAZON BUENAFE, G. R. No. xxxxxx
Accused - Accused Present:
ZAYCO, C.J.,
TAN,
-versus- VILLADOLID,
CABALLERO, and
MARTIR, JJ.
Petitioner mainly argues in the first assigned error that it was not the
overdose of morphine administered by her that killed the victim, but rather it
was the latters renal failure. However, it was admitted by the petitioner that
one of the possible effects of morphine overdose is death. Also, a significant
matter brought up during oral arguments was that other doctors supported
the finding of petitioner, a doctor herself, that the victim was suffering from
renal failure and would in fact die without proper medical attention.
The purpose of the overdose of morphine, according to petitioner, was
to alleviate the pain felt by the victim then. She lacked any intent to kill in
administering the drug and thus could not be liable for the crime charged.
The second issue is connected to the first. Petitioner cites People v.
Cadag et.a11 in saying that treachery was not properly appreciated because
the accused did not purposely employ means to avoid risk to herself or for
the victim to set up a defense. Petitioner also cites People v. Tionzon2in
arguing that treachery cannot be presumed but must be clearly proven to
have been employed by the accused.
Our Ruling
The petition lacks merit.
The overt acts of the Corazon Buenafe point to no other conclusion
than that she killed Pedro Siglain by overdosing him with morphine while he
was in no position to protest or defend himself.
(EXPLAIN FURTHER PA AMD FIRST ISSUE MUNA)
On the second issue, petitioners reliance on Cadag and Tionzon is
misplaced. In Cadag, We ruled that the killing was not attended by
treachery because on the onset of the confrontation between the group of the
accused and the victim, the accused did not make any preparation to kill the
deceased in such a manner as to insure the commission of the crime or to
make it impossible or hard for the person attacked to defend himself or
retaliate. The stabbing of the neck of the deceased which caused his death
occurred because the group of the victim approached the group of the
accused and asked why the latter previously harassed the former while they
were passing by. There was no showing that the first confrontation of the
groups, prior to the stabbing, was done with the intent to kill the victim.