People v.

Adriano, GR 205228; 15 July 2015

(Aberatio ictus)

Facts: The accused-appellant, Adriano, with other accused and Joe Does, while traversing the
Olongapo-Gapan National Road overtook the vehicle of the victim as well that of Police Offers Santos
and Garabiles. When the accused started shooting the latter swerved and fall in the road embankment.
The accused alighted from the vehicle and started shooting at the driver, Cabiede. A by stander,
Bulanan, who was standing near the road embankment was hit by a stray bullet. The four (4) armed
men hurriedly left the crime scene. The police officers followed the accused but lost track of them.
Later, both Cabiedes and Bulanan die from fatal gunshot wounds. Adriano was arrested when the
vehicle was traced as rented. Adriano was identified by the policies as one of the four assailants who
alighted from the vehicle and shot Cabiedes. An examination of the crime scene established several
bullets.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted of murder for the death of Cabieded and homicide for the
death of Bulanan. The RTC gave more credence to the testimonies of the police officers who positively
identified the former as opposed to his alibi which was not supported by clear and convincing evidence.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the RTC and ordered Adriano to pay the heirs
of Cabiedes and Bulanas, moral and actual damages.

Issue/s: Whether or not the death of Bulanan is one of murder or homicide?

Ruling: The appeal is DISMISSED with MODIFICATIONS on the ruling of the Court of Appeals.
Accused-appellant Adriano is guilty of murder for the deaths of Cabiedes and Bulanan.

The death of Cabiedes was one of murder by ambush which exemplifies the nature treachery under
paragraph 16 , Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code. As for Bulanan, who was merely a bystander, was
killed by a stray bullet. Stray bullets, obviously, kill indiscriminately and often without warning,
precluding the unknowing victim from repelling the attack or defending himself. At the outset, Adriano
had no intention to kill Bulanan, much less, employ any particular means of attack.

Logically, Bulanan’s death was random and unintentional and the method used to kill her, as she was
killed by a stray a bullet, was, by no means, deliberate. Nonetheless, Adriano is guilty of the death of
Bulanan under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code.

Pursuant to the doctrine of aberratio ictus, which imposes criminal liability for the acts committed in
violation of law and for all the natural and logical consequences resulting therefrom. While it may not
have been Adriano’s intention to shoot Bulanan, this fact will not exculpate him. Bulanan’s death
caused by the bullet fired by Adriano was the natural and direct consequence of Adriano’s felonious
deadly assault against Cabiedes. 1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful
act done be different from that which he intended. As we already held in People v. Herrera citing
People v. Hilario, “the fact that accused killed a person other than their intended victim is of no
moment.” Evidently, Adriano’s original intent was to kill Cabiedes. However, during the commission of
the crime of murder, a stray bullet hit and killed Bulanan. Adriano is responsible for the consequences
of his act of shooting Cabiedes.