PP V ADRIANO

15 July 2015| G.R. No. 205228

Perez, J.

Topic: Elements of Criminal Liability (Mental Element): Transferred Intent

(Art 4 par. 1) – Aberratio Ictus
Doctrine: Although Bulanan’s death was by no means deliberate, we shall
adhere to the prevailing jurisprudence pronounced in People v. Flora,
334 SCRA 262 (2000), where the Court ruled that treachery may be
appreciated in aberratio ictus. In Flora, the accused was convicted of
two separate counts of murder: for the killing of two victims, Emerita,
the intended victim, and Ireneo, the victim killed by a stray bullet. The
Court, due to the presence of the aggravating circumstance of
treachery, qualified both killings to murder. The material facts in Flora
are similar to the case at bar. Thus, we follow the Flora doctrine.

Actions Filed/Relief Sought:

Rolly Adriano filed an appeal before the Supreme Court for the Decision of the Court of
Appeals which affirmed the Decision of the RTC Nueva Ecija convicting Adriano of the
crime of Homicide (Crim. Case No. 13159-07) for the killing of Ofelia Bulanan (and for
the crime of Murder (Crim. Case No. 13160-07) for the killing of Danilo Cabiedes.

Facts:
On 13 March 2007 in Barangay Malapit San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, four armed men
alighted from a blue Toyota Corolla and started shooting the driver of a maroon Honda
CR-V, who was identified as Cabiedes. During the shooting, a bystander, Bulanan, who
was standing near the road embankment, was hit by a stray bullet. Cabiedes died from
three gunshot wounds on the left side of his chest, while Bulanan died on the spot after
being shot in the head.

It was found that the Corolla was registered under Antonio Rivera, and used for rental
car business, and leased out to Rolly Adriano. The latter was arrested when he arrived
at Rivera’s shop with the Corolla and was identified by PO2 Santos and PO1 Garabiles
who were at the crime scene as one of the four assailants who alighted from the
passenger’s seat beside the driver of the Corolla and shot Cabiedes.

Jalimao, Ivy Jill

Adriano pleaded not guilty and testified of his whereabouts during the time of the crime
supported by the testimony of the defense’s witnesses, Lucita Tapnio (Tapnio), Mallari,
Sunga, and Dizon to build his alibi.
RTC found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Homicide, as charged, for
the death of Ofelia Bulanan. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of RTC .

Issues:
Whether or not Adriano is guilty of the death of Bulanan?

Ruling:
The Supreme Court speaking through Justice Perez declared that although Bulanan’s
death was by no means deliberate, we shall adhere to the prevailing jurisprudence
pronounced in People v. Flora, 334 SCRA 262 (2000), where the Court ruled that
treachery may be appreciated in aberratio ictus. In Flora, the accused was convicted of
two separate counts of murder: for the killing of two victims, Emerita, the intended
victim, and Ireneo, the victim killed by a stray bullet. The Court, due to the presence of
the aggravating circumstance of treachery, qualified both killings to murder. The
material facts in Flora are similar to the case at bar. Thus, we follow the Flora doctrine.

Based on this, the Supreme Court DISMISSED the Appeal and AFFIRMED the
Decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of RTC with Modifications as the
accused is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER for the killing
of OFELIA BULANAN and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua.

Jalimao, Ivy Jill