Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 43 views

    Federico Sabay V People

    Uploaded by

    Philip Suplico
    1) The petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of slight physical injuries for assaulting Godofredo Lopez and Jervie Lopez during a confrontation over the petitioner laying pipes in Godofredo's yard. 2) The petitioner claimed self-defense, alleging that Godofredo hit him with an iron bar first and that Godofredo's son fired a gun at him. 3) The court rejected the petitioner's claim of self-defense because he failed to substantiate it with evidence like a medical certificate or testimony from the doctor he claimed to have consulted. Witnesses also refuted the petitioner's account and said it was the petitioner who attacked Godofredo first.

    Copyright:

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

    Federico Sabay V People

    Uploaded by

    Philip Suplico
    43 views1 page
    1) The petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of slight physical injuries for assaulting Godofredo Lopez and Jervie Lopez during a confrontation over the petitioner laying pipes in Godofredo's yard. 2) The petitioner claimed self-defense, alleging that Godofredo hit him with an iron bar first and that Godofredo's son fired a gun at him. 3) The court rejected the petitioner's claim of self-defense because he failed to substantiate it with evidence like a medical certificate or testimony from the doctor he claimed to have consulted. Witnesses also refuted the petitioner's account and said it was the petitioner who attacked Godofredo first.

    Original Title

    69. Federico Sabay v People

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of slight physical injuries for assaulting Godofredo Lopez and Jervie Lopez during a confrontation over the petitioner laying pipes in Godofredo's yard. 2) The petitioner claimed self-defense, alleging that Godofredo hit him with an iron bar first and that Godofredo's son fired a gun at him. 3) The court rejected the petitioner's claim of self-defense because he failed to substantiate it with evidence like a medical certificate or testimony from the doctor he claimed to have consulted. Witnesses also refuted the petitioner's account and said it was the petitioner who attacked Godofredo first.

    Copyright:

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

    Federico Sabay V People

    Uploaded by

    Philip Suplico
    1) The petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of slight physical injuries for assaulting Godofredo Lopez and Jervie Lopez during a confrontation over the petitioner laying pipes in Godofredo's yard. 2) The petitioner claimed self-defense, alleging that Godofredo hit him with an iron bar first and that Godofredo's son fired a gun at him. 3) The court rejected the petitioner's claim of self-defense because he failed to substantiate it with evidence like a medical certificate or testimony from the doctor he claimed to have consulted. Witnesses also refuted the petitioner's account and said it was the petitioner who attacked Godofredo first.

    Copyright:

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

    FEDERICO SABAY V.

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES


    G.R. NO. 192150, OCTOBER 1, 2014

    FACTS: The petitioner Federico Sabay was charged with two counts of Slight Physical Injuries.
    The RTC affirmed the MTC’s ruling convicting the petitioner of the crime. The CA likewise
    affirmed RTC’s decision.

    Records show that petitioner and his daughter, Erlinda, were laying woods and water pipes in the
    yard of Godofredo Lopez. When the latter confronted the petitioner about his intrusion, a verbal
    altercation ensued between them. In the course of the verbal exchange, Erlinda hit Godofredo on
    the head with a hard object. The petitioner joined in by throwing a stone at Godofredo’s face.
    The petitioner and Erlinda then shouted at Godofredo and threatened to kill him. Immediately
    thereafter, Jervie Lopez came and pacified the three. But in the course of his efforts, he was hit in
    the hand with a bolo.

    Petitioner denies the charge and claims that he only acted in self-defense alleging that Godofredo
    suddenly hit him with an iron bar in his right hand, causing him injuries and that Godofredo’s
    son fired a .38 caliber gun at him.

    ISSUE: Whether the claim of self-defense valid in this case?

    HELD: NO, the claim of self-defense cannot prosper because the petitioner did not substantiate
    it with clear and convincing proof. Self-defense as a justifying circumstance under Article 11 of
    the Revised Penal Code, as amended, implies the admission by the accused that he committed
    the acts that would have been criminal in character had it not been for the presence of
    circumstances whose legal consequences negate the commission of a crime. The plea of self-
    defense in order to exculpate the accused must be duly proven. The most basic rule is that no
    self-defense can be recognized until unlawful aggression is established.

    In this case, the petitioner admitted the acts attributed to him and only pleads that he acted in
    self-defense. His case essentially rests on the existence of unlawful aggression – that Godofredo
    hit him with an iron bar on his right hand. The petitioner, however, failed to substantiate his
    claimed self-defense because he did not even present any medical certificate as supporting
    evidence, notwithstanding his claim that he consulted a doctor. Nor did he ever present the
    doctor he allegedly consulted. His contention, too, that he was attacked by Godofredo and was
    shot with a .38 caliber gun by Jessie was refuted by the prosecution eyewitnesses – Rodolfo and
    Dina – who both testified that it was the petitioner who had attacked Godofredo.

    Hence, the petitioner has not successfully proved self-defense as a justifying circumstance thus
    his criminal liability remains.

    You might also like