You are on page 1of 1

PP VS CARMEN, 355 SCRA 267

FACTS:

The trial court rendered a decision and the accused appellants were all found guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Murder after having performed a cultic healing pray over which resulted to the
death of Randy Luntayao. They were sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE:

Whether or not accused-appellants can held liable for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide,
considering that the information charges them with murder.

HELD:

Yes. Conviction modified to reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Killing a person with treachery
is murder even f there is no intent to kill. When death occurs, it’s presumed to be the natural
consequence of physical injuries inflicted. In murder qualified by treachery, it’s required only that there
is treachery in the attack, & this is true even if the offender has no intent to kill the person assaulted.

One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the consequences which may naturally and
logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or intended or not.

Intent is presumed from the commission of an unlawful act. The presumption of criminal intent may
arise from the proof of the criminal act. Hence, they are liable for all the direct and natural
consequences of their unlawful act, even if the ultimate result had not been intended.