Valenton, Francis Angelo T.

Criminal Law 2

1S

Dado vs. People (G.R. No 131421)

Facts: The petitioner is Geronimo Dado. The respondent is People of the Philippines. In the case
at bar, on the night of May 25, 1992, Sultan Kudarat Police station formed three teams to
intercept cattle rustlers. The team composed of the herein petitioner SPO4 Geromino Dado and
CAFGU members waited behind a large dike at Sitio Paitan, Sultan Kudarat. At around 11:00 of
the same evening, the team saw somebody walking half-naked approaching at a distance of about
50 meters. Suddenly, Eraso, a team member, fired hid M16 rifle at the man. Thereafter, the
petitioner fired a single shot from his pistol. The victim shouted “Tay Dolfo, ako ni.” The victim
turned out to be Silvestre Butsoy Balinas, who is not the cattle rustler the team were ordered to
intercept. A certain Dr. Antenor conducted a post-mortem examination on the body of Silvestre
Balinas testified that the fatal wound that caused the death of the victim was the one inflicted on
the mid-inner thigh. Thus, Eraso and Dado were charged and found guilty of homicide.

Issue: Is the petitioner liable for homicide.

Held: The Supreme Court said that the prosecution failed to prove that the metallic fragments
found inside the fatal wound of the victim are particles of a pistol that was fired by the herein
petitioner. Also, he cannot be held responsible for the wound inflicted on the victims right outer
lateral arm for the same reason that there is no evidence proving it. The crime that the petitioner
should be liable of is Illegal Discharge of Firearm.