THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
AH CHONG, defendant-appellant.

Gibb & Gale, for appellant.

Attorney-General Villamor, for appellee

GR No. L-5272, March 19, 1910

CARSON, J:

Doctrine laid by the Court: actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. The act itself does not make
a man guilty unless his intention were so. Criminal intent is presumed from the commission of an
unlawful act. But the presumption of the criminal intent does not arise from the proof of the
commission of an act which is unlawful.

Facts: Ah Chong was a cook in Ft. McKinley. He was afraid of bad elements. On August 14,
1908, at about 10 o’clock before going to bed, he locked himself in his room by placing a chair
against the door. After having gone to bed, he was awakened by someone trying to open the
door, and believing that he was being attacked he seized a kitchen knife and struck and fatally
wounded the intruder who turned out to be his roommate, Pascual.

Issues: Whether or not Ah Chong was criminally liable for the death of his roommate, Pascual.

Ruling: No. Ah Chong must be acquitted because of mistake of fact. Had the facts been as Ah
Chong believed them to be, he would have been justified in killing the intruder under Article 11,
paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code., which requires, to justify the act, that there be –

(1) Unlawful aggression on the part of the person killed, (2) reasonable necessity of the
means employed to prevent or repeal it, and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part
of the person defending himself.

If the intruder was really a robber, forcing his way into the room of Ah Chong, there would
have been unlawful aggression on the part of the intruder. There would have been a necessity
on the part of Ah Chong to defend himself and/or his home. The knife would have been a
reasonable means to prevent or repel such aggression. And Ah Chong gave no provocation at
all. Under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code., there is nothing unlawful in the intention as
well as in the act of the person making the defense. There is an innocent mistake of fact
without any fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.