I. Overview: What “Frustrated Murder” Means in Philippine Criminal Law

In Philippine criminal law, “frustrated murder” is not a standalone concept invented by courts; it is a stage of execution of the felony of murder under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), read together with the RPC provisions on stages of execution (attempted, frustrated, consummated).

A felony is frustrated when:

The offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence;
The felony is not produced; and
The non-production is by reason of causes independent of the offender’s will.

Applied to murder, frustrated murder exists when the accused already did everything that would normally kill the victim, the victim did not die, and the survival is due to something outside the offender’s control (timely medical intervention, fortuitous resistance of the body, quick rescue, etc.).

The practical dividing line is this:

Attempted murder: the accused begins the attack but does not perform all acts of execution (e.g., is stopped, misses, weapon fails before delivering a fatal blow).
Frustrated murder: the accused delivers a potentially fatal act and finishes what he set out to do (e.g., stabs the victim in vital organs, shoots at the torso/head at close range), but death does not occur due to independent causes.
Consummated murder: the victim dies.

Frustrated murder is often litigated because the prosecution must prove that the acts were sufficient to cause death absent external intervention, not merely that the injuries were serious.

II. Statutory Anchors in the Revised Penal Code

A Philippine legal analysis typically draws from three RPC pillars:

Murder (definition and qualifying circumstances);
Stages of execution (attempted, frustrated, consummated); and
Penalties (the penalty for murder and how it is adjusted for frustrated stage and for aggravating/mitigating circumstances).

Murder is distinguished from homicide primarily by the presence of qualifying circumstances (discussed below). The stage (attempted or frustrated) affects the degree of penalty imposed.

III. Elements of Frustrated Murder

To convict for frustrated murder, the prosecution must establish, beyond reasonable doubt, all of the following:

A. The Elements of Murder (Except Death)

A person was attacked and sustained injuries;
The accused inflicted the injuries;
There was intent to kill; and
At least one qualifying circumstance attended the killing (even though death did not result).

B. The Elements of Frustration (Stage of Execution)

All acts of execution were performed which would have produced the death;
Death did not occur; and
The failure to produce death was due to causes independent of the accused’s will.

If the prosecution cannot prove the “all acts of execution” requirement, the offense may drop to attempted murder or to a different charge (e.g., serious physical injuries), depending on intent and circumstances.

IV. The Crucial Issue: Proving Intent to Kill

A. Intent to Kill vs. Intent to Injure

Intent to kill is the heartbeat of attempted/frustrated homicide or murder. Without it, the case tends to fall into physical injuries (serious, less serious, slight), even if the wounds are grave.

B. How Intent to Kill Is Proven

Intent to kill is rarely proved by direct admission; it is inferred from facts such as:

Weapon used (firearm, large knife, bolo);
Nature, number, and location of wounds (shots/stabs to head, neck, chest, abdomen);
Manner of attack (close-range shots, repeated stabbing, continued assault even after victim falls);
Statements or threats before/during the attack;
Persistence (chasing victim, preventing escape, finishing blows); and
Conduct after attack (continuing to assault; or conversely, desisting may sometimes support “attempted” rather than “frustrated,” depending on the facts).

Intent to kill is not presumed just because a deadly weapon was used, but deadly weapons aimed at vital parts strongly support that inference.

V. Qualifying Circumstances: When the Offense Is Murder (Not Homicide)

For murder, the law requires that the attack be attended by any qualifying circumstance recognized in the RPC. The most commonly litigated include:

A. Treachery (Alevosia)

Treachery is present when the offender employs means, methods, or forms in the execution that ensure the crime without risk to himself from defense or retaliation by the victim. Core ideas:

Attack is sudden or unexpected, leaving no chance to defend;
The means were consciously adopted to ensure execution.

Treachery is frequently alleged in ambushes, attacks on unsuspecting victims, or shooting from behind.

B. Evident Premeditation

Requires proof of:

The time when the accused decided to commit the crime;
An act showing persistence in that decision; and
Sufficient time between decision and execution for reflection.

Courts demand strict proof; it is not lightly appreciated.

C. Abuse of Superior Strength / Use of Force

Where the accused purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the victim’s defense, often in group attacks.

D. Other Qualifiers

Depending on the factual setting, qualifiers may include circumstances such as killing for a price/reward, by means of fire, poison, explosion, etc., though these are less common in “frustrated” cases.

Important: A qualifier must be alleged in the Information (the charging document) to be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance. If not properly alleged, it may at most be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance (and even then, subject to procedural and doctrinal limits).

VI. The “All Acts of Execution” Test in Frustrated Murder

The second battlefield in frustrated murder is whether the accused truly performed all acts of execution that should have produced death.

A. What Counts as “All Acts of Execution”?

Generally, when the accused:

Strikes or shoots the victim in a vital area in a manner ordinarily fatal; and
There is no further act needed from the offender for death to occur;

then all acts of execution may be deemed complete.

Examples that commonly support frustration:

A close-range gunshot to the torso/head where medical intervention prevents death;
Repeated stabbing penetrating vital organs where emergency surgery saves the victim.

B. What Often Reduces It to Attempted Murder?

The accused is prevented from delivering the fatal blow (intervened upon);
The shot misses or hits non-vital parts without evidence it would have caused death;
The accused abandons the attack before completing what would have killed the victim, particularly if desistance is truly voluntary and occurs before all acts of execution are done.

C. Medical Evidence and “Mortal Wound” Discussions

While “mortal wound” language is common, the legal inquiry is not just “serious injury,” but whether the injuries were such that death would have resulted without independent causes (like timely medical attention). Medical testimony or records often become central to this element.

VII. Charging and Pleading: How Prosecutors Frame the Case

A. Typical Charge

The Information will usually be captioned as Frustrated Murder and will:

Identify the accused, victim, date, place;
Narrate the acts (shooting, stabbing, hacking, etc.);
Allege intent to kill; and
Specifically allege the qualifying circumstance(s) (e.g., treachery).

B. Why Proper Allegation Matters

A qualifying circumstance not alleged cannot “upgrade” homicide to murder for purposes of conviction.
If treachery is not alleged, the court may convict only for frustrated homicide (if intent to kill is proven) or physical injuries.

C. Complex and Special Allegations

Some scenarios produce special pleading issues:

Multiple assailants: conspiracy may be alleged; all may be liable if unity of purpose and acts are proven.
Victim survives but with permanent disability: prosecutors may consider physical injuries charges if intent to kill is doubtful.
Multiple victims: separate counts per victim.

VIII. Penalties: The Core Sentencing Framework

A. Baseline Penalty for Murder

Under the RPC, murder is punished by reclusion perpetua to death. (In current practice, death penalty is not imposed; courts apply the remaining range consistent with existing law on non-imposition of death penalty, but the murder penalty framework still matters for computing degrees.)

B. Penalty for Frustrated Felony: One Degree Lower

For a frustrated felony, the penalty is one degree lower than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.

So, for frustrated murder, the starting point is:

One degree lower than reclusion perpetua to death, which is reclusion temporal.

C. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL)

As a rule, when the penalty imposed is divisible and not otherwise excluded, Philippine courts apply the Indeterminate Sentence Law, imposing:

A maximum term within the range of the penalty properly imposable (after considering modifying circumstances); and
A minimum term within the range of the penalty next lower in degree.

For frustrated murder, since the base is typically reclusion temporal, the maximum will be somewhere within reclusion temporal (adjusted by any mitigating/aggravating circumstances), and the minimum will generally be within the penalty next lower (which is prision mayor), again subject to proper computation.

D. Modifying Circumstances: Aggravating and Mitigating

The court then considers circumstances that affect the period of the penalty (minimum, medium, maximum period), such as:

Aggravating circumstances (generic): nighttime, dwelling, use of motor vehicle, etc., if properly alleged/proven and not absorbed;
Mitigating circumstances: voluntary surrender, plea of guilty, incomplete self-defense, etc.

Note on absorption: Some circumstances may be absorbed by the qualifying circumstance depending on doctrine (for example, some aspects of abuse of superior strength may be absorbed in treachery, depending on how they are alleged and proven). The effect depends heavily on the factual theory of the case.

IX. Civil Liabilities When the Victim Survives

Even when there is no death, criminal conviction carries civil liabilities, which may include:

Actual damages (medical bills, rehabilitation costs, lost income);
Moral damages (mental anguish, trauma);
Exemplary damages (when aggravating circumstances are present);
Temperate damages (when actual loss is proven but not with certainty as to amount, in appropriate cases).

These are typically awarded in the criminal case itself unless the civil action is reserved or waived, subject to procedural rules.

X. Common Defenses and How Courts Usually Assess Them

A. Denial and Alibi

Generally weak unless supported by credible, independent evidence and physical impossibility of presence at the crime scene.

B. Self-Defense / Defense of Relatives / Defense of Stranger

A justifying circumstance requires:

Unlawful aggression by the victim;
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent/repel it; and
Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the defender.

Self-defense becomes particularly difficult when the evidence shows treachery or a sudden, unprovoked attack by the accused.

C. Accident

If the accused claims the injuries were accidental, intent to kill is disputed. The presence of repeated blows, targeting of vital organs, or continued assault tends to negate accident.

D. Lack of Intent to Kill (Physical Injuries Only)

This defense focuses on:

Non-vital wound locations;
Single superficial injury;
Immediate cessation and assistance to the victim (not conclusive, but relevant);
Absence of threats or pursuit.

If the prosecution cannot prove intent to kill, the court may convict for serious physical injuries (or other injuries) rather than frustrated murder/homicide.

E. No Qualifying Circumstance (Homicide, Not Murder)

Even with intent to kill and frustration, if the qualifying circumstance (e.g., treachery) is not proven or not properly alleged, conviction may be for frustrated homicide rather than frustrated murder.

XI. Relationship to Other Possible Charges

A. Frustrated Homicide

Same stage-of-execution analysis and intent to kill, but without qualifying circumstances. Penalty is lower because homicide’s baseline penalty is lower.

B. Serious Physical Injuries

If intent to kill is absent, but the injuries are severe (incapacity to work, permanent deformity, loss of organ, etc.), the proper charge may be serious physical injuries, depending on the medical and factual findings.

C. Attempted Murder

If all acts of execution were not performed—because the accused was stopped, weapon malfunctioned before completing the fatal act, or the injuries were not shown to be sufficient to cause death—attempted murder may be the correct designation, assuming a qualifying circumstance is present.

D. Multiple Offenders and Conspiracy

Where conspiracy is established, each conspirator may be liable as a principal even if only one delivered the wound, so long as the acts are shown to be in furtherance of the common design.

XII. Practice Notes: What Typically Decides a Frustrated Murder Case

A. The “Medical Narrative”

Depth and trajectory of wounds;
Whether vital organs were hit;
Whether the injury was life-threatening;
Whether immediate intervention prevented death.

B. The “Treachery Narrative”

Victim’s ability (or inability) to defend;
Suddenness and method of attack;
Whether the accused consciously adopted the means.

C. Consistency of Eyewitness Testimony

Identification (lighting, distance, familiarity);
Corroboration (CCTV, ballistics, physical evidence);
Motive (not essential, but can strengthen credibility).

D. Proper Allegation in the Information

Even strong evidence can be legally downgraded if qualifying circumstances or relevant aggravating circumstances are not properly alleged.

XIII. Sentencing Illustration (Conceptual)

While exact computations depend on the proven modifying circumstances, the typical structure is:

Identify penalty for consummated murder (reclusion perpetua to death);
Lower by one degree for frustrated stage → reclusion temporal;
Determine the proper period (minimum/medium/maximum) based on mitigating/aggravating circumstances;
Apply Indeterminate Sentence Law (when applicable):
- Maximum: within the selected range of reclusion temporal;
- Minimum: within the range of the penalty next lower (prision mayor).

XIV. Key Takeaways

Frustrated murder requires (a) intent to kill, (b) a qualifying circumstance (like treachery), (c) performance of all acts of execution, and (d) non-death due to causes independent of the offender’s will.
The two most contested questions are: Was there intent to kill? and Were all acts of execution performed?
The base penalty for frustrated murder is typically reclusion temporal (one degree lower than the consummated murder penalty framework), with sentencing shaped by modifying circumstances and usually structured through the Indeterminate Sentence Law where applicable.
If the qualifier fails, the offense may become frustrated homicide; if intent to kill fails, it may become serious physical injuries or a related injuries offense.