044 VALCORZA v. PEOPLE AUTHOR: JANNA October 31, 1969; G.R. No. L-28129 Pimintel escaped jail.

Valcorza and others tried to apprehend him. After TOPIC: Rule 113 Arrest HOW MADE almost giving up, they find him. P jumped V, and ran away. V gave chase PONENTE: DIZON, J. and after firing warning shots, fired directly at P to stop him. P died from Case 01 of Rule 113, p. 6 gunshot a little after. V is acquitted by SC, as he was in performace of duty. FACTS 1. June 4, 1960 Roberto Pimintel was jailed as a detention prisoner at Maramag, Bukidnon for stealing a chicken, from which escaped at around 1:00pm while Valcorza was on Patrol duty. 2. A police patrol team (Sgt. Daiton, Patrolmen Caas, Lubido, and Valcorza) went to a place called Poultry Area in barrio Cuya, Maramag, Bukidnon where Pimintel was reportedly hiding. Their efforts to apprehend Pimintel was fruitless, so they chose to stay the night at Tarosas house and leave the next day. 3. June 6, 1960 at 5:00am, while squatting to defacate at a bridge near Tarosas house, Sgt. Daiton was slowly approached by a person.He ordered the person to stop, but the person instead jumped down into the creek. 4. Daiton yelled for his companions, suspecting that man was Pimintel. They all went to search the area near the creek. 5. Pimintel suddenly emerged from the bushes and lunged at Valcorza and struck him twice with a stone. Valcorza was worried his revolver would be taken, so he called out to Caas. 6. Pimintel ran away and Valcorza immediately gave chase and fired a shot into the air, ordered him to stop, but Pimintel did not listen. Valcorza fired into the air 4 more times while in pursuing the former at a distance of 100m. 7. Worried his patrol team might fail in catching Pimintel, Valcorza fired a 5th shot at Pimintel, who was 3 meters away, as the latter was in the act of again jumping into another part of the creek. 8. The patrol team went into the water to locate Pimintel, and found him alive and floating with a wound on his back. He was placed in the police jeep and taken to Maramag for treatment, but he died a few minutes after arrival. 9. Elias Valcorza surrendered with his firearm to the Chief of Police when he arrived at the municipal building. 10. Oct. 3, 1962 Valcorza testified in open court and gave ff. justification for the shot (1)He tried to hit the leg after warning shots were ignored; (2) spur of the moment decision; (3) fear of failure to apprehend and bring to jail; (4) only fired while Pimintel was in the act of jumping into a creek with waters 8 feet deep. 11. Claim that he aimed only at the leg = not consistent with sworn statement given to Constabulary soldiers on the day of the incident of June 6, 1960 Then I still follow him and fire my revolver four (4) times up in the sky to stop him but still he continue running, so what I did I fired him one direct hit shot on his back then he tried dive escape into the water ISSUE: W/N Valcorza should be held guilty of homicide for the death of Pimintel. HELD: NO, because Valcorzas actions were committed in the performance of his duty, and was more or less necessary to prevent the escaping prisoner from eluding arrest. RATIO: 1. While Pimintels offense was minor (stealing a chicken), and the Court does not in any way want to encourage law officers to be trigger happy, nor employ force and violence upon persons under their custody, the following facts cannot be disregarded: a. Pimintel, in violation of the law, had escaped from detention; b. When ordered to stop by Sgt. Daiton whom he must have recognized as a peace officer in his pursuit he ran away and then threw himself into a creek to elude his pursuer; c. He suddenly emerged from bushes [] and assaulted [Valcorza] with a stone and then ran away d. [Valcorza] does not appear to be a trigger-happy policeman as shown by the fact that he had fired five cautionary shots into the air and decided to aim directly at the escaping detainee only when he had already reasons to fear that the latter would be able to elude him and his companions. 2. Facts and circumstances constrain Court to hold that Valcorzas actions, which unfortunately resulted in Pimintels death, was committed in the performance of his official duty and was more or less necessary to prevent the escaping prisoner from successfully eluding the officers of the law. 3. To hold Valcorza guilty of homicide = detriment to public interest because: a. May have the effect of demoralizing police officers discharging official functions identical or similar to those in the performance of which petitioner was engaged at the time he fired at the deceased b. Result = half-hearted and dispirited efforts to comply with such official duty.