BULACAN STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE EDUCATION

CRIMINAL LAW 1 - CASE DIGEST

Mariano v. People
G.R. No. 224102 - JULY 26, 2017
Leonen, J.

FACTS:

The petitioner is desiring for a review of his case after the decision of Regional Trial Court charging him of
Frustrated Homicide in an Information dated July 23, 2010.

The version of the Prosection is that, at about 9:45 p.m. on July 22, 2010, Yuki hit Natividad in the head,
believing that Natividad would inform Yuki's aunt he was selling marijuana, according to the prosecution's
account of events. To report the punching, Natividad went to Yuki's house. Natividad met petitioner
Mariano and his common-law wife, Pamela Rivera, at Yuki's residence. Mariano then stabbed Natividad
twice, one in the buttocks and the other in the right side of his body, later in the night. The noise outside
was noticed by Antonio San Juan, who was in his canteen. San Juan discovered that Natividad had been
stabbed when he checked. He readily gave the kitchen knife to San Juan, who apprehended him and
submitted both him and the kitchen knife to police.

Meanwhile, the defense claimed that Mariano was in his mother's house on July 22, 2010, about 8:30
p.m. He then went to Pamela's house, where he saw Natividad and Yuki arguing because Yuki refused to
buy marijuana for Natividad. Pamela's daughter, Pia Rivera, was kicked and smacked by Natividad, who
went insane (Pia). Yuki and Pia were being harmed by Natividad, Mariano hurried inside to notify his
mother-in-law and Pamela. Pamela was punched in the face and shoulder by Natividad, who responded
by punching her. Natividad was shoved to the ground by Mariano. Natividad rose to his feet, grabbed a
piece of wood, and continued to attack Mariano. Because Natividad was drunk and unsteady, petitioner
Mariano was able to avoid Natividad's punches. Mariano stabbed Natividad in the buttocks with a knife.
Mariano stabbed Natividad again, this time on the right side of his body, as a result of Natividad's
constant pounding. Mariano stated that he acted in self-defense as well as in the defense of a family
member.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Mariano is exempted from criminal liability for defending a stanger?

RULLING:

Yes. The requisites of defense of stranger are the following: Unlawful aggression, Reasonable necessity
of the means employed to prevent or repel it, and that the person defending be not induced by revenge,
resentment, or other evil motive.

The unlawful aggression is when Natividad attacked Pamela. The attacked made by Natividad is enough
to be a unlawful aggression. Also, to mentioned that Mariano only intervered in between when Pamela
was attacked is an unlawful aggression.
On the second requisite, reasonable necessity of the means employed where said by the Court of
Appeals were reasonable. In which, disagreed by the Court because the state of mind of the accused is to
defend and there is no enough time for him to think what tool to use to save or defend.

The last requisites is that the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive. Petitioner was not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive. The victim himself,
Natividad, testified that he had no issues with petitioner before the incident. Thus, all the elements to
invoke the justifying circumstance of defense of a stranger were present in this case.