GR 19850; (March, 1923) (Digest)

🔎 Search 66,000+ AI-Enhanced SC Decisions...

G.R. No. 19850; March 24, 1923
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMUALDO MIJARES, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On June 4, 1921, Avelino Crisol, a traffic inspector of the Bureau of Public Works, went to the municipality of Virac to examine an apprentice for a chauffeur’s license. At the house of the apprentice’s employer, Crisol was met by the accused, Romualdo Mijares. Crisol presented and began reading a letter from the district engineer authorizing the examination. Before Crisol could finish, Mijares, believing Crisol was responsible for unfavorable reports about him, struck Crisol, causing him to fall down the steps. Mijares continued to assault Crisol, pursuing him and inflicting multiple bruises. The injuries caused pain and swelling for about four days but did not require medical attention or incapacitate Crisol. The trial court convicted Mijares of resistance and serious disobedience to an agent of authority under Article 252 of the Penal Code.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly classified the offense committed by the appellant.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court modified the conviction. The Court held that Avelino Crisol was a public officer (funcionario publico) at the time of the assault, as his duties as an inspector involved the exercise of discretion in government functions. The correct applicable law is Article 251 of the Penal Code, which penalizes the laying of violent hands upon public officers, regardless of whether the act occurs during a public uprising. The Court clarified that the commonly used Spanish edition of the Penal Code contained an erroneous text of Article 251, which had led to misinterpretation. The authentic text makes the article applicable to assaults on public officers even outside the context of rebellion or sedition. Consequently, the appellant is guilty of assault upon a public officer under Article 251 in relation to the last paragraph of Article 250. The penalty is modified to six months of arresto mayor.


This is AI Generated. Powered by Armztrong.

⚖️ AI-Assisted Research Notice This legal summary was synthesized using Artificial Intelligence to assist in mapping jurisprudence. This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute a lawyer-client relationship or legal advice. Users are strictly advised to verify these points against the official full-text decisions from the Supreme Court.
spot_img

Hot this week

GR 1678; (February, 1905) (Critique)

GR 1678; (February, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe decision in...

GR 1731; (February, 1905) (Critique)

GR 1731; (February, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court's application...

GR 1728; (February, 1905) (Critique)

GR 1728; (February, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court's application...

GR 1686; (February, 1905) (Critique)

GR 1686; (February, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court's reversal...

GR 1663; (February, 1905) (Critique)

GR 1663; (February, 1905) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court's meticulous...

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img