G.R. No. 33463, December 18, 1930
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS vs. BASILIO BORINAGA

FACTS

On the evening of March 4, 1929, the victim Harry H. Mooney was seated on a chair inside a store, with his back to a window. The accused, Basilio Borinaga, approached stealthily from the window and struck a knife at Mooney’s back. The knife, however, lodged into the back of the chair instead of hitting Mooney, who fell from the force of the blow but was uninjured. Borinaga fled but returned about ten minutes later to renew the attack, but was thwarted as Mooney and the store owner were then on guard and shone a flashlight at him. Prior to the attack, Borinaga was heard declaring his intent to stab Mooney, an “American brute.” After the incident, he was also overheard expressing regret for missing his mark and being unable to strike again due to the flashlight. Borinaga was prosecuted for frustrated murder. The trial court convicted him as charged.

ISSUE

Whether the acts committed by the accused constitute the crime of frustrated murder or merely attempted murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court, by majority, AFFIRMED the conviction for FRUSTRATED MURDER.

The Court held that the accused performed all the acts of execution necessary to produce the felony. The homicidal intent was clear, a deadly weapon was used, and the attack was directed treacherously at a vital part of the victim’s body. The failure to inflict a wound was due to a cause independent of the perpetrator’s willthe knife hitting the chair instead. Since the subjective phase of the criminal act (all acts of execution) was completed, and the result (death) did not ensue only because of this external fortuity, the crime is frustrated, not merely attempted. The penalty imposed by the trial court was upheld.

DISSENTING OPINION:
Justices Villa-Real, Johnson, and Street dissented, opining that the crime was only attempted murder. They reasoned that for frustrated murder, the offender must have performed all acts of execution, which would include the actual infliction of a mortal wound. Here, the blow never reached the victim’s body; it was intercepted by the chair. Thus, not all acts of execution were performed. The prevention of the wounding itself (not the prevention of death after wounding) by an external cause makes the crime an attempt under Article 3 of the Penal Code.