Josue vs.

People

The victim, Macario, was a Barangay Tanod buying a medicine in a store near the residence of tue
accused. Victim then saw the accused approaching him and shouting on why did the victim painted his
vehicle. The accused then fired three times towards him hitting his finger, elbow and back. The victim
was rushed to the hospital and luckily survived his near of death situation.

The accused denied the said statements and claiming that it is an ac of self defense because the victim
together with a companion saw thay they are about to steal the engine of his jeep.

ISSUE: WON, the accused is criminally liable for frustrated homicide.

RULING: Yes. The Court finds, and so holds, that both the trial and appellate courts have correctly ruled
on the petitioner’s culpability for the crime of frustrated homicide, which has the following for its
elements: (1) the accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of a deadly weapon in his
assault; (2) the victim sustained fatal or mortal wound/s but did not die because of timely medical
assistance; and (3) none of the qualifying circumstance for murder under Article 248 of the Revised
Penal Code is present.