Crisanto Amerga y Lapuz v. People

Summary

The Supreme Court denied petitioner Crisanto Amerga y Lapuz's petition but modified his conviction from Frustrated Homicide to Attempted Homicide. The Court ruled that petitioner waived his right to challenge the allegedly defective Information by entering a plea without filing a motion to quash. Regarding the substantive issue, while Dr. Nierves testified that the victim could have bled to death without medical attention, he also stated on cross-examination that the victim could have recovered without medical intervention. This created reasonable doubt about whether the victim sustained mortal wounds that would have caused death without timely medical assistance—a required element for Frustrated Homicide. The Court applied the rule that any doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused. Petitioner was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of four months arresto mayor to four years and two months prision correccional, plus P20,000 each for civil indemnity and moral damages.