US v DE LA CRUZ
Further, that he attacked her without saying anything; when
Justifying Circumstances: Defense of Honor
PONENTE: Vickers, J.
DOCTRINE:
RULING FORMAT: CFI- Convicted. SC- Reversed Decision; Acquitted.
FACTS:
(1) On February 18, 1934, Francisco Ramos, his wife Brigida, his sister
Baltazara, Consuelo Santoyo and defendant went to a wake held in
the house of Maria Inguit.
(2) At about 9PM, the defendant and the group headed home.
(3) 5 minutes later, they were followed by one Enrique Bautista and
deceased Franciso Rivera, who was playing cards in the house where
the wake was held.
(4) Upon reaching a narrow path, Rivera went ahead of Bautista. The
group was walking in a single filethe defendant being at the very
back. She was 2 brazas away from the person in front of her.
(5) Francisco Ramos suddenly heard someone cry out Aruy, Dios mio.
He went back and found the deceased stabbed under the right breast.
He was taken to the hospital where he died the next day.
(6) Ramos testified that when he found the deceased, Bautista was with
him, and that defendant was on the way back to the house. He
overtook her and found her with a knife in her hand. When they got to
the house, defendant stuck the knife into a table and said she stabbed
deceased because he embraced her.
(7) Bautista testified that defendant waited on the right side path near
some guava trees and stabbed Rivera with a knife when he was about
1 foot away from her; that deceased cried upon being stabbed and
defendant turned around to return to the house, saying Icao ay
malaon na.
(8) Defendant testified that when they reached the narrow path, a man
suddenly threw his arms around her from behind and held her breasts
and kissed her, touching her private part; that he held her and tried to
throw her down; and that when she couldnt do anything more, she
took a fan knife from her pocket and stabbed him in defense of her
honor.
she asked he did not answer; That she could barely recognize his face
in darkness and could not be sure it was Francisco Rivera.
(9) CFI found evidence showing that deceased had been making love to
the defendant and another woman; that Rivera and defendant were
engaged, that she was madly in love with him and was extremely
jealous of the other woman. Thereby, found defendant guilty of
homicide and sentenced her to suffer not more than 14 years, 8
months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal and not less than 8 years and
1 day of prision mayor; indemnify the heirs of deceased P1000.
ISSUE: W/N defendant is justified from her act
HELD:
(1) Appellant stabbed deceased only once, although retained possession
of the knife. She could have inflicted other wounds on him if she had
desired, but desisted as soon as he released her.
(2) Evidence shows that an officer of the Constabulary went to see
deceased in the hospital, but Rivera did not tell him anything about
the circumstances which he had been stabbed.
(3) The appellant is an illiterate barrio girl, unable to write her name and
scarcely 18 years old; therefore, it is not improbable that she was
reluctant to tell the story of what had happened to the people back in
the house.
(4) A study of the record shows that deceased did in fact grab hold of
defendant; whether or not he intended to rape her, taking into
consideration that it was dark and she was grabbed without warning
or making himself known, and the fact she was not able to free herself
by means of her strength alone, she was justified to use her pocket-
knife in repelling what she believed was an attack upon her honor.
She had no other means of defending herself.
(5) Although defendant claimed to cry for help and it was not heard by
any of her companions, taking into consideration the circumstances of
the case, she is exempt from criminal liability.
(6) US v Sta Ana:
This court held that a woman in defense of her honor is
justified in inflicting wounds on her assailant with a bolo which
she happens to be carrying, even though her cry for assistance
might have been heard by people near by.