56.

PEOPLE V RICOHERMOSO

L – 30527 – 28 | March 29, 1974 | J. Aquino

Avoidance of Greater Evil or Injury

Facts:
Geminiano de Leon, together with his common-law wife, son Marianito de Leon and one
Rizal Rosales, chanced upon Pio Ricohermoso. Owning a parcel of land, which
Ricohermoso cultivated as kaingin, Geminiano asked about his share of palay harvest
and added that she should be allowed to taste the palay harvested from his land.
Ricohermoso said Geminiano could collect the palay anytime.
Upon returning from his trip to Barrio Bagobasin, Geminiano dropped by Ricohermoso’s
house and asked him about the palay, to which the latter answered defiantly that he will
not give him the palay, whatever happens. Geminiano remonstrated and that point (as if
by prearrangement), Ricohermoso unsheathed his bolo, while his father-in-law Severo
Padernal got an axe, and attacked Geminiano. At the same time and place,
Ricohermoso’s brother-in-law Juan Padernal suddenly embraced Marianito. They
grappled and rolled down the hill, at which point Marianito passed out. When he
regained consciousness, he discovered that the rifle he carried beforehand was gone
and that his father was mortally wounded.
The defendants shifted the responsibility of killing in their version of the case.

Issue:
W/N appellant Juan Padernal can invoke the justifying circumstance of avoidance of a
greater evil or injury

Ruling:
No. Juan Padernal’s reliance on the justifying circumstance is erroneous because his act
in preventing Marianito from shooting Ricohermoso and Severo Padernal, the
aggressors in this case, was designed to insure the killing of Geminiano de Leon without
any risk to the assailants and not an act to prevent infliction of greater evil or injury. His
intention was to forestall any interference in the assault.
Treachery was also appreciated in the case. The trial court convicted the appellants with
lesiones leves, from an attempted murder charge with respect to Marianito de Leon.
Judgment as to Juan Padernal affirmed.