Peoplev.

Lanuza
Facts: Accusedappellant, Rodel Lanuza, was found guilty by the RTC of the crime of frustrated
homicideandsentencedhimtoimprisonmentfrom4yrsofprisioncorreccionalasminimumto7yrsof
prisionmayorasmaximumforwillfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslyattack,assaultandshootJoelButay.
AccdgtoRodelLanuza,theincidenthappenedatthebasementoftheBIROfficeinLaoagCity.That
reprimandedLanuzafornotreportingtoworkinthemorningwhilethevictimwashandlingdownhis
shotguntoLanuza.ThatButayheldtheshotgunwithbothhandswiththemuzzlepointedatButayandthe
butttowardsLanuza.Atthatmoment,theaccusedgrippedthefirearmwithonehand,withhispointer
fingerinsidethetriggerguardandontopofthetriggeritself.Accdgtohimhealmostslipwiththe
shotgunwhileintheactofgrippingandthenimmediatelythegunwentoff;theincidenthappenedsofast
thenherealizedthataccidentallyshotButayhittinghimattheleftsideofthewaist.Thathewenttothe
telephoneupstairstocallforanambulance.However,heheardthesoundofamotorcycleleavingtheBIR
premisesonlytofindoutthatitwasButay.Thereafter,heproceededtotheLaoagCitypolicestationand
surrendered.
ButayhedidnotactuallyhandtheshotguntotheLanuza.Hemerelyplacedit,togetherwithonebullet,
ontopofthesecurityguardstable.ThataccdgtohimhewasturningoversixbulletstoLanuzaandhe
evenassertedthatthefiveotherswereinsideadraweronthesecurityguardstableattheirofficeupstairs.
ThatButayrepirmandedLanuzabecausethelatterdidnotreportonhisscheduledshift,Lanuzathengot
theshotgun,placedtheammunitioninsideit,andshothim.Lanuzawentnearhimandpulledthetriggera
secondtime,buttheshotgundidnotfireandheheardonlyaclick.Theaccusedranupstairs,andthe
victimcrawledtohismotorcycleanddroveithimselftotheprovincialhospital.
WiththedecisionoftheRTC,LanuzaappealedtotheCAcontendingthatheshotprivatecomplainantby
mere accident that if he really had the intent to kill, he could have shot private complainant with
precision..ThatoneoftheelementsfortheexemptingcircumstanceofaccidentunderArticle12(4)ofthe
RevisedPenalCode,andthathebeimposedasentenceinaccordwithArticle67ofthesameCode,which
specificallyprovidedforthepenaltytobeimposedwhennotalltherequisitesofexemptionofthefourth
circumstanceofArticle12arepresent.CAaffirmedRTCsdecision.

Issue: WON theactofLanuzaqualifies asanexemptingcircumstance,thushis sentenceshouldbe

decreased

Held:Thecourtdeniedthepetition.Theelementsoffrustratedhomicideare:(1)theaccusedintendedto
killhisvictim,asmanifestedbyhisuseofadeadlyweaponinhisassault;(2)thevictimsustainedfatalor
mortalwound/sbutdidnotdiebecauseoftimelymedicalassistance;and(3)noneofthequalifying
circumstanceformurderunderArticle248oftheRevisedPenalCodeispresent.Evidencetoproveintent
tokillincrimesagainstpersonsmayconsist,ofthemeansusedbythemalefactors;thenature,location
andnumberofwoundssustainedbythevictim;theconductofthemalefactorsbefore,atthetimeof,or
immediatelyafterthekillingofthevictim;thecircumstancesunderwhichthecrimewascommitted;and
themotiveoftheaccused.
Theseelementsareextantinthecaseatbar.Thepenaltyprescribedbylawforthecrimeoffrustrated
homicide is one degree lower than that prescribed by law for the crime of homicide.Under the
indeterminatesentencelaw,themaximumofthesentenceshallbethatwhichcouldbeproperlyimposed
inviewoftheattendingcircumstances,andtheminimumshallbewithintherangeofthepenaltynext
lowertothatprescribedbytheRevisedPenalCode.
Considering that the penalty prescribed bylaw for the crime of homicide is reclusion temporal, the
penaltyforthecrimeoffrustratedhomicidewouldbeprisionmayor.Applyingtheindeterminatesentence
law,therebeingthemitigatingcircumstanceofvoluntarysurrenderandnoaggravatingcircumstance,the
maximumofthesentenceshouldbewithintherangeofprisionmayorinitsminimumtermwhichhasa
durationofsix(6)yearsandone(1)daytoeight(8)years,andthat,ontheotherhand,theminimum
shouldbewithintherangeofprisioncorreccionalwhichhasadurationofsix(6)monthsandone(1)day
tosix(6)years.Thus,theimpositionofimprisonmentfromfour(4)yearsofprisioncorreccional,as
minimum,toseven(7)yearsofprisionmayor,asmaximum,isinorder.