G.R. No. L-45964; April 25, 1939
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RESTITUTO FALLER (alias R. Aguilar), defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Restituto Faller was charged with the crime of damage to property committed “maliciously and willfully.” After trial, the Court of First Instance of Rizal found that the damage was not committed maliciously and willfully, but through reckless imprudence. Consequently, the court convicted Faller under Article 365, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code for damage through reckless imprudence, sentencing him to pay a fine and indemnify the offended party. Faller appealed, contending he was convicted of a crime different from that with which he was charged.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of damage through reckless imprudence when he was originally charged with malicious mischief (willful and malicious damage).

RULING

No, the trial court did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that reckless imprudence is not a crime in itself but merely a way of committing a crime and determines a lower degree of criminal liability. The information alleged the appellant acted “willfully, maliciously, unlawfully and criminally.” Since no objection was interposed to the information, and negligence resulting in a crime is punishable, the allegation that the acts were committed “unlawfully and criminally” includes a charge of acting with negligence. The constitutional right to be informed of the nature of the accusation was deemed satisfied, especially as the accused himself presented a defense during trial that he was, at most, liable for damage through reckless imprudence.

AI Generated by Armztrong.