Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3K views

    People Vs Sabalones

    Uploaded by

    Shiela Pilar
    On June 1, 1985, Rolusape Sabalones and others ambushed two vehicles, killing two people and injuring three. A witness claimed this was done to retaliate for a slapping incident involving Sabalones' father-in-law and Nabing Velez, whose wake was that night. The courts found Sabalones killed the wrong people based on a statement and testimony. Sabalones believed the victims were supporters of recently slain Nabing Velez coming to retaliate. The trial court observed Sabalones positioned themselves in defense of their turf against the perceived avenging gang. The Supreme Court held this was a case of mistaken identity, not aberratio ictus, as Sab

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People Vs Sabalones

    Uploaded by

    Shiela Pilar
    3K views1 page
    On June 1, 1985, Rolusape Sabalones and others ambushed two vehicles, killing two people and injuring three. A witness claimed this was done to retaliate for a slapping incident involving Sabalones' father-in-law and Nabing Velez, whose wake was that night. The courts found Sabalones killed the wrong people based on a statement and testimony. Sabalones believed the victims were supporters of recently slain Nabing Velez coming to retaliate. The trial court observed Sabalones positioned themselves in defense of their turf against the perceived avenging gang. The Supreme Court held this was a case of mistaken identity, not aberratio ictus, as Sab

    Original Description:

    People vs Sabalones CRIMINAL LAW CASE DIGEST

    Original Title

    People vs Sabalones

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    On June 1, 1985, Rolusape Sabalones and others ambushed two vehicles, killing two people and injuring three. A witness claimed this was done to retaliate for a slapping incident involving Sabalones' father-in-law and Nabing Velez, whose wake was that night. The courts found Sabalones killed the wrong people based on a statement and testimony. Sabalones believed the victims were supporters of recently slain Nabing Velez coming to retaliate. The trial court observed Sabalones positioned themselves in defense of their turf against the perceived avenging gang. The Supreme Court held this was a case of mistaken identity, not aberratio ictus, as Sab

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    3K views1 page

    People Vs Sabalones

    Uploaded by

    Shiela Pilar
    On June 1, 1985, Rolusape Sabalones and others ambushed two vehicles, killing two people and injuring three. A witness claimed this was done to retaliate for a slapping incident involving Sabalones' father-in-law and Nabing Velez, whose wake was that night. The courts found Sabalones killed the wrong people based on a statement and testimony. Sabalones believed the victims were supporters of recently slain Nabing Velez coming to retaliate. The trial court observed Sabalones positioned themselves in defense of their turf against the perceived avenging gang. The Supreme Court held this was a case of mistaken identity, not aberratio ictus, as Sab

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    PEOPLE vs.

    SABALONES
    FACTS:
    On June 1, 1985 at 11:45 PM, respondents including Rolusape Sabalones, armed with firearms, attacked
    and ambushed individuals riding in two vehicles resulting to the death of two persons and injury to three
    others.
    According to a witness presented, Sabalones was implicated in the killing of Nabing Velez because of the
    slapping incident involving her father-in-law, Federico Sabalones, Sr. and Nabing Velez, which took place
    prior to the death of Junior Sabalones (whose wake was during time of the commission of the crime).
    The conclusion of the trial court and the Court of Appeals that the appellants killed the wrong persons was
    based on the extrajudicial statement of Appellant Beronga and the testimony of Jennifer Binghoy. These
    pieces of evidence sufficiently show that appellants believed that they were suspected of having killed the
    recently slain Nabing Velez, and that they expected his group to retaliate against them.
    The Trial Court observed that they went to their grisly destination amidst the dark and positioned
    themselves in defense of his turf against the invasion of a revengeful gang of supporters of the recently slain
    Nabing Velez.
    ISSUE: W/N the case is one of aberratio ictus
    HELD:
    NO. The case is not one of aberration ictus but one of error in personae or mistake in identity, as observed
    by the OSG.
    Transferred intent is used when a defendant intends to harm one victim, but then unintentionally harms a
    second victim instead. In this case, the defendant's intent transfers from the intended victim to the actual
    victim and can be used to satisfy the mens rea element of the crime that the defendant is being charged
    with. The transferred intentdoctrine is only used for completed crimes, and is not used for attempted crimes.
    Aberratio ictus means mistake in the blow, characterized by aiming at one but hitting the other due to
    imprecision of the blow. In the case at bar, the appellants opened fire because they mistook the vehicles to
    be carrying the avenging men of Nabing Velez. The fact that they were mistaken does not diminish their
    culpability. The Court has held that mistake in identity of the victim carries the same gravity as when the
    accused zeroes in on his intended victim.

    You might also like