G.R. Nos. 29535-29536, November 26, 1928
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MANUEL LOJO, JR., defendant-appellant.

FACTS

In the early morning of January 18, 1928, Manuel Lojo, Jr. was driving his car with two passengers. While speeding with one headlight off, he approached Pretil Bridge on Juan Luna Street. Policeman Nicanor Constantino, who was on duty in the middle of the road, raised his club to signal Lojo to stop. Instead of obeying, Lojo continued at high speed, ran straight towards the policeman, and hit him. The impact caused Constantino to be thrown onto the car’s radiator, then to the running board, and finally to the ground, resulting in his instant death from a skull fracture and multiple injuries. After the incident, Lojo ignored his passenger’s plea to stop, sped away, and told her to keep quiet. He also later ignored another policeman’s signal to stop. Lojo claimed he tried to swerve to avoid the policeman, who allegedly moved in the same direction, and that he fled out of fear.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in its factual finding regarding the deceased policeman’s position and signal.
2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of consummated homicide.
3. Whether the penalty for violating a city ordinance was erroneous.
*(The core legal issue, as resolved by the Supreme Court, is the proper criminal liability of the appellant for his actions.)*

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction but MODIFIED the penalty in the homicide case ( G.R. No. 29535 ) and AFFIRMED the conviction in the ordinance violation case ( G.R. No. 29536 ).

1. The trial court’s factual findings were upheld. The evidence clearly showed that Policeman Constantino was in the middle of the road signaling Lojo to stop, and Lojo’s disregard of this order, his high speed, and his subsequent flight demonstrated his conscious indifference to the consequences.

2. The Supreme Court agreed that Lojo was criminally liable but held that he committed a complex crime. His act constituted not just homicide, but also assault upon an agent of authority (under Articles 249 and 250 of the Revised Penal Code), as the policeman was performing his official duties. Applying Article 89 of the RPC (on complex crimes), the penalty for the more serious crime (homicide) should be imposed in its maximum degree.

3. The penalty for the ordinance violation was affirmed as correct.

DISPOSITIVE:
* In G.R. No. 29535 , the judgment was modified. Appellant Manuel Lojo, Jr. is found guilty of the complex crime of assault upon an agent of authority with homicide and sentenced to eighteen (18) years of reclusion temporal, with the indemnity and costs affirmed.
* In G.R. No. 29536 , the judgment convicting him of violating the city ordinance and sentencing him to six months’ imprisonment and a fine was affirmed in toto.