G.R. No. L-6378, March 20, 1911
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PELAGIO CAPA and AURELIO CARIÑO (alias CALIXTO), defendants. AURELIO CARIÑO (alias CALIXTO), appellant.

FACTS

Defendants Pelagio Capa and Aurelio Cariño were charged with lesiones graves. The trial court convicted them, sentencing Cariño to prision correccional. Cariño appealed, raising three errors: (1) the court failed to inform him of his right to counsel and permitted non-lawyer Bernabe de Guzman to represent him; (2) the evidence did not prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and (3) the crime was improperly qualified as lesiones graves. The evidence showed that the victim, Francisco Garcia, went to retrieve a fighting cock and was struck by Cariño with a stick on the arm. Garcia testified his arm bone was fractured, he was treated by a doctor for eight days, and he could no longer work with that hand. However, the attending physician was not presented as a witness. Another witness (Ciriaco Capucao) testified he saw only a “small lesion” on Garcia’s hand shortly after the incident.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in not informing appellant of his right to counsel and in allowing representation by a non-lawyer.
2. Whether the evidence proved appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
3. Whether the crime was correctly qualified as lesiones graves under Article 416(2) of the Penal Code.

RULING

1. No error regarding legal representation. Although Bernabe de Guzman was not a licensed attorney, the appellant desired his representation, and Guzman actively participated in the trial without objection. The proceedings were orderly, and no substantial right of the appellant was prejudiced. An error that does not affect substantial rights is not a ground for reversal.
2. Guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt for the act of inflicting injury. However, the qualification of the crime as lesiones graves was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution failed to present the best evidencethe testimony of the attending physicianto establish the gravity of the injury (i.e., loss or hindrance of the use of a principal member, making the victim useless for his habitual work, as required under Article 416[2]). Garcia’s testimony alone, contradicted in part by Capucao’s account of a “small lesion,” was insufficient to meet the high standard of proof for the aggravating qualification.
3. The crime is properly classified as lesiones menos graves under Article 418 of the Penal Code. The judgment is reversed. Appellant Aurelio Cariño is sentenced to two months and one day of arresto mayor and to pay the costs.