G.R. No. L-13397; April 1, 1918
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SABINO AVIADO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
Sabino Aviado, a duly appointed internal revenue agent, received information about an illicit distillery operating without a license in Alitaya. On the night of March 15, he and his companions raided the distillery. Upon arrival, Aviado arrested Juan Soriano, one of the operators. While Aviado was holding Soriano and identifying himself as an officer, Soriano broke free, drew a bolo, and wounded Aviado on the forearm. Soriano then fled, pursued by Aviado and his companions. During the pursuit, Soriano turned and attacked another agent, Juan Canlas, with the bolo. Canlas warded off the first blow, but Soriano prepared to strike a second time. To save Canlas’s life, Aviado fired at Soriano, fatally wounding him. The trial court convicted Aviado of homicide.

ISSUE:
Whether a peace officer (an internal revenue agent) is justified in killing an escaping prisoner to protect another peace officer whom the prisoner is attacking.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of conviction and acquitted Sabino Aviado. The killing was held to be justifiable under Article 8, paragraph 6 of the Penal Code, which exempts from criminal liability anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided there is unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of provocation by the defender. The Court found that Aviado, as an internal revenue agent, had the duty to arrest persons operating an illicit distillery. When the deceased, after wounding Aviado, attacked another agent with a bolo, there was unlawful aggression and imminent danger to the agent’s life. Firing his weapon was a reasonably necessary means to prevent the killing of his companion. The Court emphasized that Aviado acted without any evil motive, exactly as he would in defense of his own person, and that his actions were a lawful and justified defense of another.