CALIMUTAN v.

PEOPLE
FACTS: Cantre and witness Saano, together with two
other companions, had a drinking spree at a videoke
bar but as they were headed home, they crossed paths
with Calimutan and Michael Bulalacao. Cantre, 26
years old and 5 ft. 9 inches, had a grudge against
Bulalacao, a 15 year-old boy of 5ft. for suspecting that
he threw stones at the his house on a previous night so
he punched him.
Seeking to protect Bulalacao and to stop Cantre,
Calimutan picked a stone, as big as a mans fist and
hitting Cantre at the left side of his back not noticing
that Bulalacao was already able to ran away. Cantre
stopped for a moment and held his back and Calimutan
desisted from any other act of violence. Witness
Saano then brought Cantre home where he
complained of backache and also of stomach ache and
was unable to eat.
By night time, he felt cold then warm then he was
sweating profusely and his entire body felt numb.
Having no vehicle, they could not bring him to a doctor
so his mother just continue to wipe him with a piece of
cloth and brought him some food when he asked.
After eating a little, he vomited. Shortly after
complaining again of his backache and stomach ache,
he died.
The Post-Mortem Examination Report and Certification
of Death, issued and signed by Dr. Ulanday, stated that
the cause of death of victim Cantre was cardiorespiratory arrest due to suspected food poisoning
The autopsy showed that there was internal
hemorrhage and massive accumulation of blood in his
abdominal cavity due to his lacerated spleen caused by
a blunt object like a stone.
RTC: Essentially adopting the prosecutions account of
the incident, held that Calimutan was guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of homicide to indemnify the heirs of
Philip Cantre the sum of P50,000 as compensatory
damages and the sum of P50,000 as moral damages
CA: Affirmed RTC
Calimutan filed a petition for review on certiorari
contending that the dissimilar findings on the cause of
death constituted reasonable doubt
ISSUE: W/N he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
homicide
HELD: NO. MODIFIED Calimutan is found GUILTY
beyond reasonable doubt of reckless imprudence
resulting in homicide, under Article 365 of the Revised
Penal Code, and is accordingly sentenced to

imprisonment for a minimum period of 4 months of

arresto mayor to a maximum period of two years and
one day of prision correccional. Petitioner Calimutan is
further ORDERED to pay the heirs of the victim Cantre
the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for the
latters death and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt requires only a moral
certainty or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind (NOT absolute
certainty and the exclusion of all possibility of error)
Dr. Mendezs testimony as an expert witness is
evidence, and although it does not necessarily bind the
courts, it is accorded great weight and probative value
and may sufficiently establish the causal relationship
between the stone thrown by the Calimutan and the
lacerated spleen of the Cantre which resulted in the
latters death
Proximate cause is the cause, which, in natural and
continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury, and WITHOUT
which the result would NOT have occurred.
Prosecution was able to establish that the proximate
cause of the death of the Cantre was the stone thrown
at him by petitioner Calimutan.
Comparing the limited autopsy conducted by Dr.
Ulanday and her unconfirmed suspicion of food
poisoning of the victim Cantre, as opposed to the
exhaustive autopsy performed by Dr. Mendez and his
definitive finding of a ruptured spleen as the cause of
death, then the latter, without doubt, deserves to be
given credence by the courts.
Article 3 of the RPC classifies felonies according to the
means by which they are committed, in particular:
(1) intentional felonies - existence of malicious intent;
(2) culpable felonies - absence of malicious intent; the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack
of foresight or lack of skill
Calimutan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
culpable felony of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but
without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which
material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack
of precaution on the part of the person performing or
failing to perform such act, taking into consideration
his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence,
physical condition and other circumstances regarding
persons, time and place.