Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Case Digest On People V.lamahangdocx

    Uploaded by

    Giane Endaya
    Aurelio Lamahang was caught trying to break into a store by removing boards from a wall in the early morning. He was convicted of attempted robbery. The Supreme Court held that this was only an attempted trespass as there was no clear intent established to commit robbery inside. For a crime of attempt, there must be a logical connection between the acts done and the intended offense, and the facts in this case did not unavoidably point to an intent to rob.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Digest On People V.lamahangdocx

    Uploaded by

    Giane Endaya
    2K views1 page
    Aurelio Lamahang was caught trying to break into a store by removing boards from a wall in the early morning. He was convicted of attempted robbery. The Supreme Court held that this was only an attempted trespass as there was no clear intent established to commit robbery inside. For a crime of attempt, there must be a logical connection between the acts done and the intended offense, and the facts in this case did not unavoidably point to an intent to rob.

    Original Title

    Case Digest on People v.lamahangdocx

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Aurelio Lamahang was caught trying to break into a store by removing boards from a wall in the early morning. He was convicted of attempted robbery. The Supreme Court held that this was only an attempted trespass as there was no clear intent established to commit robbery inside. For a crime of attempt, there must be a logical connection between the acts done and the intended offense, and the facts in this case did not unavoidably point to an intent to rob.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views1 page

    Case Digest On People V.lamahangdocx

    Uploaded by

    Giane Endaya
    Aurelio Lamahang was caught trying to break into a store by removing boards from a wall in the early morning. He was convicted of attempted robbery. The Supreme Court held that this was only an attempted trespass as there was no clear intent established to commit robbery inside. For a crime of attempt, there must be a logical connection between the acts done and the intended offense, and the facts in this case did not unavoidably point to an intent to rob.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    CASE DIGEST ON PEOPLE v. LAMAHANG [61 Phil.

    703 (1935)]
    Facts: Aurelio Lamahang was caught opening with an iron bar a wall of a store of cheap goods in Fuentes St. Iloilo. He broke one board and was unfastening another when a patrolling police caught him. Owners of the store were sleeping inside store as it was early dawn. Convicted of attempt of robbery Issue: WON crime is attempted robbery? Held: No. Attempted trespass to dwelling. Attempt should have logical relation to a particular and concrete offense which would lead directly to consummation. Necessary to establish unavoidable connection & logical & natural relation of cause and effect. Important to show clear intent to commit crime. In case at bar, we can only infer that his intent was to enter by force, other inferences are not justified by facts. Groizard: infer only from nature of acts executed. Acts susceptible of double interpretation cant furnish ground for themselves. Mind should not directly infer intent. Spain SC: necessary that objectives established or acts themselves obviously disclose criminal objective.

    You might also like