Direct assault – 2nd Form/Art. 148 of the RPC.

[admin]

G.R. No. 231267
Feb. 13, 2023
 
Direct assault – 2nd Form (Elements)/Art. 148 of the RPC.

"Any person or persons who, without a public uprising, shall attack, employ force, or seriously intimidate or resist any person in authority or any of his [or her] agents, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on occasion of such performance.”

 

1. That the offender (a) makes an attack, (b) employs force, © makes a serious intimidation, or ( d) makes a serious resistance.

2. That the person assaulted is a person in authority or his [ or her] agent.

3. That at the time of the assault the person in authority or his [or her] agent (a) is engaged in the actual performance of official duties, or [b] that he [ or she] is assaulted by reason of the past performance of official duties.

4. That the offender knows that the one he [ or she] is assaulting is a person in authority or his [ or her] agent in the exercise of his [ or her] duties.

5. That there is no public uprising.

 Mallari v. People (Mallari)
G.R. No. 224679, February 12, 2020, citing Geligv. People, 640 Phil. 109, 116 (2010).
 
Characterization of an agent of persons in authority

Any person who, by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and property, such as barrio [councilor], barrio [police officer] and barangay leader, and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority, shall be deemed an agent of a person in authority.

 

That traffic enforcers are agents of persons authority for they in fact maintain public order.

 

Compare with Resistance and Serious Disobedience under Art. 151 of the RPC

To be considered as direct assault, the laying of hands or the use of physical force against the agent of a person in authority must be serious.

 

In United States v. Gumban, this Court held that the amount of force employed against agents of persons in authority spells the difference between direct assault and resistance of disobedience.

 

x x x. It is said in these two cases that any force is not sufficient to constitute an assault[,] but that it is necessary to consider the circumstances of each case to decide whether the force used is, or is not, sufficient to constitute assault upon an agent of authority.

 

Previous convictions for direct assault against an agent of a person in authority involve force that is more severe than slapping and punching. In United States v. Cox, the accused "seized [the police officer] by the throat, threw him to the ground, and struck him several blows with the club which he succeeded in wresting from the [police officer.]"

In Rivera v. People, the accused repeatedly hurled menacing threats against the police officer, challenged him to a fight, and scored a punch on the lip as they grappled. The officer sustained an injury that would take several days to heal.

 

The act of pointing and aiming a gun may not be as forceful as described in Mallari, but the same is serious enough even to an agent of persons in authority. Prudence dictates that one cannot simply pull out a gun and aim towards a person in a heat of argument or altercation. If taken lightly, and not meted with stringent consequences, it would leave a negative impression and cause great danger and at the expense of public order and peace.