PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

vs.
DANIEL PINTO, JR. and NARCISO BUENAFLOR, JR.,
G.R. No. 39519
November 21, 1991

I. Ticker : Error in personae/Mistake in the Identity

II. Doctrine : Aberratio Ictus or mistake in the identity of the victim carries the same
gravity as when the accused zeroes in on his intended victim. The main reason
behind this conclusion is the fact that the accused had acted with such a disregard
for the life of the victim(s) without checking carefully the latter’s identity as to place
himself on the same legal place as one who kills another wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously.

III. Fact:

 A police operation to serve a search warrant in the premises of Francisco

Bello thru policemen Daniel Pinto, Jr. and Narciso Buenaflor, Jr for alleged
position of rifle and submachine gun.
 On the night of the execution to serve the warrant a shooting incident
happened. One vehicle which carry members of Tiongson family, driver
and a priest was fired by the operatives. Richard Tiongson died the
following day while Maria Theresa was fatally wounded.
 Despite the incident, the police operative pursued its mission to haunt for
Francisco Bello. When they reached the residence of Bello’s parents, they
found out different types of firearms. Thereafter, the Chief of Police,
declared the search terminated and the entire searching party left for the
headquarters.
 Bello and his party arrived in Daraga, Albay and stayed in the house of
Inocencia Malbas. Early in the morning successive burst of gunfire were
heard, Bello, who was in the balcony was gradually fall down, with his
hands above his head. He died due to multiple gunshot wounds. Rosalio
Andes was also shot and was killed allegedly fought back with authorities.
He died due to multiple gunshot wounds.

ISSUE: Whether the defendants’ defense of mistake in the identity of the victim in tenable in
relation to the death of the Rosalie Andes and Richard Tiongson and injury inflicted upon Maria
Theresa Tiongson?

Decision / Ruling 
No.
The fact that the victims were different from the ones the appellants intended to injure cannot
save them from conviction.
Aberratio Ictus or mistake in the identity of the victim carries the same gravity as when the
accused zeroes in on his intended victim. The main reason behind this conclusion is the fact that
the accused had acted with such a disregard for the life of the victim(s) without checking
carefully the latter’s identity as to place himself on the same legal place as one who kills another
wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously. Neither may the fact that the accused made a mistakein
killing one man instead of another be considered a mitigating circumstance.