US vs DIVINO - DIGEST

Facts: The Court of First Instance convicted Feliciano Divino for the crime of lesions graves and was
sentenced to two years and eleven months and suspension from public office.

A girl named Alfonsa, about 13 years of age when the incident happened, was a servant for Feliciano Divino
and his family. She is a member of the Bagobo tribe, and because of lack of proper nutrients in the tribe, her
body was full of scars. Her feet were the focus in this case because it is said that Feliciano Divino burned her
feet, in a very unorthodox and harmful way in a sense, by setting her feet on fire after applying petroleum to
it and tying her down to the floor. He argued in the court that when Alfonsa came to their home, her body
was full of scars and ulcers, and that the ulcer in her body was cured, through his efforts, except those on
her feet. He tried many times to cure her feet but failed because the girl would always walk barefoot outside
and that she would run whenever she was being cured because of the pain being inflicted in the process. On
the day of the incident, Feliciano said to have tied her up so she won’t run during the process and then left
her feet burning for about an hour and then afterwards locked her up. He argued that the ulcer was getting
worse and smelled quite offensively.

Issue: Whether Feliciano Divino can be acquitted because he argued that he acted in good faith and did not
mean any harm to the girl, except to help her get cured.

Held: Medical arguments were brought in the light of the decision and that a doctor clearly identified that
the scars on Alfonsa’s feet were indeed because of burns and that the wounds became worse on account of
Feliciano’s efforts to cure them. Certainly it was found certain that the acts of the guilty person do not seem
to have been intended to cause an evil, but rather as a remedy. However, article 568 or the Penal Code
clearly states that a person that undertakes medical assistance to another person is liable for any injuries
resulting from such treatment, and the fact that he acted in good faith and according to the best of his
ability does not relieve him from responsibility, although his ignorance may be considered as a mitigating
circumstance. In lieu, the Court reversed the ruling of the Court of First Instance and sentence Divino to
simple imprudence to the penalty of four months and suspension from office and right to suffrage and to
pay the costs of both instances.

Page 1 of 1