People vs.

Guillen
G.R No. L-1477
January 18, 1950
Facts:
The accused Julio Guillen, was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime murder and multiple
frustrated murder , after his attempt to assassinate the President of the Philippines, Manuel Roxas on
March 10, 1947. Guillen was sentenced to the penalty of Death; with this the accused filed an appeal.

The Court ordered that the accused’ mental condition be examined and it was found out that he was
insane. During the 1946 Presidential Elections, Guillen voted for the opposing candidate of Manuel
Roxas. According to the accused, he was disappointed with the latter for failing to redeem and fulfil
promises made during the elections, and it was aggravated when, the President sponsored a
campaigned for the approval of the so-called “parity” instead of looking after the interest of his country.
Consequently, the accused was determined to assassinate the President and found the opportunity to
do so on the night of March 10, 1647, when the President attended an assembly at Plaza de Miranda,
Quiapo, Manila. Guillen first intended to use a revolver to accomplish his goal but has previously lost his
license d firearm, instead, the accused though of using two hand grenades which were given to him by
an American soldier in exchange for two bottles of whisky. The accused stood on the chair he had been
sitting on and hurled the grenade at the President when the latter had just closed his speech. A general
who was on the platform saw the smoking grenade and kicked it away from the platform towards an
open space where he thought the grenade was likely to do least harm. The grenade exploded in the
middle of a group of persons standing close to the platform and grenade fragments seriously injured
Simeon Varela, who died next day due to the mortal wounds caused and several other persons. Guillen
was arrested and he readily admitted to his responsibility.
Issue:
Whether or not the accused was guilty only of homicide through reckless imprudence in regard to the
death of Simeon Varela of less physical injuries in regard to the other injured persons
Held:
No, the facts do not support the contention of the counsel for the appellant. In throwing the hand
grenade at the President with the intention of killing him, the appellant acted with malice and is
therefore liable for all the consequences of his wrongful act. As provided by Article 4 of the Revised
Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act
done be different from that which he intended. In criminal negligence, the injury caused to another
should be unintentional. It being simply the incident of another act performed without malice. As held
by the this Court, a deliberate intent to do an unlawful act is essentially inconsistent with the idea of
reckless imprudence. Where such unlawful act is wilfully done, a mistake in the identity of the victim
cannot be considered reckless imprudence.
The sentence of the trial court is affirmed by unanimous vote and death sentence shall be executed in
accordance with Article 81 of the Revised Penal Code.