G.R. No. 5649
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ISAAC SAMONTE, defendant-appellant.
September 6, 1910
FACTS:
On the night of September 6, 1908, Isaac Samonte (appellant) and Basilio Rabe engaged in a quarrel in Verdades Street, barrio of Macalalong, Pitogo, Tayabas. Samonte knocked Rabe down and proceeded to maltreat him. Rabe called “police! police!”. Municipal policeman Gregorio Glindo, on patrol 6-8 brazas away, heard the cries and immediately went to the scene, arriving as Rabe was getting up. The disturbance had not fully terminated.
Glindo attempted to arrest Samonte, saying, “In the name of the United States, don’t move.” Samonte resisted, saying, “Don’t come near, because I will take your life,” and struck at Glindo with a knife (though Glindo was not wounded). Due to this resistance, Glindo could not effect the arrest. He reported the incident to Councilman Demetrio Pandeño, who ordered Glindo to arrest Samonte.
Glindo and Pandeño found Samonte at Mutingbayan. Glindo again attempted to arrest Samonte, but Samonte resisted, striking at Glindo with the knife a second time. When Pandeño ordered Samonte to submit, Samonte declared, “I do not recognize anyone,” and struck at Pandeño with the knife (neither officer was wounded). Samonte was not arrested that night.
Samonte was charged and convicted in the Court of First Instance for criminal attempt against an agent of the authorities. He appealed, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove an attempted arrest and that, even if an attempt occurred, the warrantless arrest was unauthorized.
ISSUE:
1. Was the warrantless arrest attempted by Municipal Policeman Gregorio Glindo lawful, even though he did not directly witness the initial assault but arrived immediately upon hearing calls for help while the disturbance was ongoing?
2. Did Isaac Samonte’s resistance to this arrest, by striking at the policeman and later the councilman with a knife (without actually wounding them), constitute criminal attempt against an agent of the authorities?
RULING:
The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction.
1. Yes, the warrantless arrest was lawful. An officer tasked with preserving public peace may arrest without a warrant any person committing or having committed a breach of the peace in his presence. An offense is considered committed “in the presence or within the view” of an officer when the officer sees the offense (even at a distance), or hears the disturbances created thereby and proceeds at once to the scene, and the offense is continuing or has not been consummated at the time the arrest is made. In this case, Policeman Glindo heard Rabe’s cries for help and arrived shortly thereafter while the trouble had not yet terminated, even if active fighting had ceased. Thus, it was Glindo’s duty and authority to make the arrest without a warrant.
2. Yes, Samonte’s resistance constituted criminal attempt against an agent of the authorities. Article 249, paragraph 2 of the Penal Code penalizes those who attack, employ force against, gravely intimidate, or offer equally grave resistance to authorities or their agents while discharging their functions. Samonte, after a lawful attempt to arrest him by a duly authorized police officer, offered “grave resistance” by refusing to submit and by striking at both the policeman and the councilman with a knife. The fact that the officers were not wounded or touched by the knife does not absolve Samonte from criminal responsibility, as the act of striking with the knife itself signified a clear attempt to inflict personal injury and offered grave resistance.
