Scribd
Upload
92 views2 pages

US V Ah Chong

Ah Chong was employed as a cook who lived in quarters at Fort McKinley with his roommate Pascual Gualberto. There had been robberies, so they reinforced their door lock. One night, someone tried forcing open the door. Ah Chong called out but heard no answer and feared a robber. When the door opened, Ah Chong struck out with a knife in the darkness, killing Gualberto. The court ruled Ah Chong was not criminally liable because his mistake of fact - believing the intruder was a robber - was made without negligence or fault, as the circumstances allowed no time for further inquiry. Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed, his actions would have been

Uploaded by

bantucin davoo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
92 views2 pages

US V Ah Chong

Ah Chong was employed as a cook who lived in quarters at Fort McKinley with his roommate Pascual Gualberto. There had been robberies, so they reinforced their door lock. One night, someone tried forcing open the door. Ah Chong called out but heard no answer and feared a robber. When the door opened, Ah Chong struck out with a knife in the darkness, killing Gualberto. The court ruled Ah Chong was not criminally liable because his mistake of fact - believing the intruder was a robber - was made without negligence or fault, as the circumstances allowed no time for further inquiry. Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed, his actions would have been

Uploaded by

bantucin davoo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Topic: Felonies- Mistake of Fact

G.R. No. L-5272 March 19, 1910

THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,


vs.
AH CHONG, defendant-appellant.

Doctrine: There is no criminal liability, provided that the ignorance or mistake of fact was not due
to negligence or bad faith.

Facts:
The defendant, Ah Chong, was employed as a cook in one of the Officers’ quarters at Fort
McKinley, Rizal Province. Together living with him in the said quarters was the deceased, Pascual
Gualberto, who was employed as a houseboy.

There had been several robberies in Fort McKinley prior to the incident thus prompting
the defendant and his roommate to reinforce the flimsy hook used to lock the door of their room by
placing a chair against it. The defendant and the deceased had an understanding that when either
returned at night, he should knock on the door and say his name.

On the night of Aug. 14, 1908, Ah Chong, who was alone in his room, was awakened by
someone trying to force open the door of the room. The defendant called out twice, asking the
identity of the person but heard no answer. Fearing that the intruder was a robber or a thief, the
defendant called out that he would kill the intruder if he tried to enter. At that moment, the door
was forced open and the defendant was struck first above the knee by the edge of the chair.

Because of the darkness of the room, the defendant thought he was being hit by the
intruder and tried to defend himself by striking wildly at the intruder using a common kitchen knife
which he kept under his pillow.

It turned out that the said intruder was actually the defendant’s roommate, Pascual
Gualberto. The roommate was brought to the military hospital where he died from the effects of the
wound the following day.

Issues:
1. What are the requisites of mistake of fact?
2. Is Ah Chong criminally liable?

Rulings:

1. Requisites for mistake of fact to be a valid defense:


 that the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to
be.
 that the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful, and
 that the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused.

2. Ah Chong is not criminally liable. The Court ruled that had the intruder been a robber as the
defendant believed him to be, then Ah Chong acted in good faith, without malice or criminal intent,
and would have been wholly exempt from criminal liability and that he cannot be said to have been
guilty of negligence or recklessness.

Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed them to be, he would have been justified in killing the
intruder under Article 11, paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code, which requires, to justify the act,
that there be —
(1) unlawful aggression on the part of the person killed,
(2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it, and
(3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

As applied in this case:


(1) If the intruder was really a robber, forcing his way into the room of Ah Chong, there would have
been unlawful aggression on the part of the intruder.
(2) There would have been a necessity on the part of Ah Chong to defend himself and/or his home.
The knife would have been a reasonable means to prevent or repel such aggression.
(3) And Ah Chong gave no provocation at all. Under the Revised Penal Code, there is nothing
unlawful in the intention as well as in the act of the person making the defense.

If such ignorance or mistake of facts is sufficient to negative a particular intent, it destroys the
presumption of intent and works an acquittal
The rule does not apply (1) where the circumstances demand a conviction under the penal
provisions governing negligence and (2) in cases where a person voluntarily committing an act incurs
criminal liability even though the act be different from that which he intended to commit.
The mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused. There is an innocent
mistake of fact without any fault or carelessness on the part of the accused, because, having no time
or opportunity to make any further inquiry, and being pressed by circumstances to act immediately,
the accused had no alternative but to take the facts as they then appeared to him, and such facts
justified his act of killing the deceased.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy