People vs.
Intod
G.R. No. 103119 (October 21, 1992)
Nature:
Petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming in toto the judgment of the
Regional Trial Court, Branch XIV, Oroquieta City, finding him guilty of the crime of attempted
murder.
Facts:
Sulpicio Intod was found guilty as affirmed in entirety by the Court of Appeals on the judgment
of the Regional Trial Court, Branch XIV, Oroquieta City, of the crime of attempted murder on
the life of Bernardina Palampangan due to a land dispute between Palampangan and one of the
other petitioner.
In the morning of February 4, 1979, Sulpicio Intod, Jorge Pangasian, Santos Tubio and Avelino
Daligdig went to Salvador Mandaya's house in Katugasan, Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental and
asked him to go with them to the house of Bernardina Palangpangan. Thereafter, Mandaya and
Intod, Pangasian, Tubio and Daligdig had a meeting with Aniceto Dumalagan. He told Mandaya
that he wanted Palangpangan to be killed because of a land dispute between them and that
Mandaya should accompany the four (4) men, otherwise, he would also be killed.
At about 10:00 o'clock in the evening of the same day, Petitioner, Mandaya, Pangasian, Tubio
and Daligdig, all armed with firearms, arrived at Palangpangan's house in Katugasan, Lopez
Jaena, Misamis Occidental. At the instance of his companions, Mandaya pointed the location of
Palangpangan's bedroom. Thereafter, Petitioner, Pangasian, Tubio and Daligdig fired at said
room. It turned out, however, that Palangpangan was in another City and her home was then
occupied by her son-in-law and his family. No one was in the room when the accused fired the
shots. No one was hit by the gun fire.
Petitioner and his companions were positively identified by witnesses. One witness testified
that before the five men left the premises, they shouted: "We will kill you (the witness) and
especially Bernardina Palangpangan and we will come back if you were not injured".
After trial, the Regional Trial Court convicted Intod of attempted murder. The court (RTC), as
affirmed by the Court of Appeals, holding that Petitioner was guilty of attempted murder.
Petitioner seeks from this Court a modification of the judgment by holding him liable only for
an impossible crime, citing Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code.
Issue:
Whether an incomplete consummation of an intended criminal offense against Bernandina
Palangpangan cannot be considered as an attempted murder but rather can only be considered
as impossible crime as per Art 4 paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code.
Held:
The Court holds that the petition is hereby GRANTED, the decision of respondent Court of
Appeals holding Petitioner guilty of Attempted Murder is hereby MODIFIED. We hereby hold
Petitioner guilty of an impossible crime as defined and penalized in Articles 4, paragraph 2, and
59 of the Revised Penal Code, respectively. Having in mind the social danger and degree of
criminality shown by Petitioner, this Court sentences him to suffer the penalty of six (6) months
of arresto mayor, together with the accessory penalties provided by the law, and to pay the
costs.