Professional Documents
Culture Documents
People Vs Gona
People Vs Gona
Upon trial the court below found the defendant guilty as charged in the
information and taking into consideration the extenuating circumstance
contrary to the previous decision of the court in the case of US v
Mendieta, where the court emphasized that a mistake of killing one
Case Digest: man instead of another, when it is proved that he acted with maliciously
and willfully, cannot relieve him from criminal responsibility, therefore
Doctrine: CAUSES THAT PRODUCE A DIFFERENT RESULT
even if Mansaca Gona mistakenly killed Mapundol instead of Dunca, he
MISTAKE AS TO VICTIM. — As a result of a quarrel, the defendant is still guilty of intentional homicide, whereby appealed sentence is
endeavored to kill D, but by mistake, killed M. Held, that his mistake in affirmed with the costs against the defendant.
killing one man instead of another did not relieve him from criminal
responsibility and could not even be considered a mitigating
circumstance.
Facts:
Prior to the incident, Mansaca Gona had a fight with Mansaca Dunca in
a celebration where both of them are intoxicated of alcoholic drinks.
Mansaca Mapundol were also present in that said celebration.
Mansaca Dunca left the celebration followed by Mansaca Mapundol.
Dependant, Mansaca Gona went home also with an intent to assault
Mansaca Dunca, but in the darkness of evening and intoxicated state,
he mistook Mapundol for Dunca and inflicted wound using a bolo and
consequently the victim died.
Held: