PEOPLE v. ABAGON 3.

Lack of sufficient provocation on part of person defending

11 SCRA 255 (1988) Judgment: Judgment appealed from is affirmed, but the himself. Here, there was no provocation at all since he was
penalties are modified asleep
Nature: Appeal from the judgment of the CFI of Masbate PEOPLE v. NARVAEZ
121 SCRA 389 (1983) Since not all requisites present, defendant is credited with the
Facts: On April 17, 1981, while Cells Lupango and his special mitigating circumstance of incomplete defense, pursuant
companions were celebrating the birthday of Isabelo Radaza Jr., Nature: Appeal from decision of the CFI of South Cotabato to par. 6 Art. 13 RPC.
Abner Ongonion and Mateo Abagon arrived. Ongonion, with a
six-inched double-bladed knife stabbed Cells Lupango 3 or 4 Facts: Mamerto Narvaez has been convicted of murder Mitigating circumstances:
times. Abagon also stabbed Lupango several times with a (qualified by treachery) of David Fleischer (F) and Flaviano 1. Voluntary surrender
seven-inch knife. While Lupango was carried out, Ongonion, Rubia. On August 22, 1968, Narvaez shot Fleischer and Rubia 2. Passion and obfuscation (read p. 405 explanation)
who was waiting outside, drew his firearm and fired two shots at during the time the two were constructing a fence that would
Lupango and his companions to scare them off. When they ran prevent Narvaez from getting into his house and rice mill. The Crime is homicide (2 counts) not murder because treachery is
away, Ongonion, Abagon and their companions approached and defendant was taking a nap when he heard sounds of not applicable on account of provocation by the deceased. Also,
took turns in stabbing the body of Celis Lupango with bolos and construction and found fence being made. He addressed the assault was not deliberately chosen w/ view to kill since slayer
knives. group and asked them to stop destroying his house and asking acted instantaneously. There was also no direct evidence of
if they could talk things over. Fleischer responded with "No, planning or preparation to kill.
Issues, Held and Ratio: gadamit, proceed, go ahead." Defendant lost his "equilibrium,"
1. WON Ongonion and Abagon are guilty of murder and shot Fleisher with his shotgun. He also shot Rubia who was ART 249 RPC: Penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal.
running towards the jeep where the deceased's gun was placed. However, due to mitigating circumstances and incomplete
Yes. Having admitted the killing, Ongonion must clearly Prior to the shooting, Fleischer and Co. (the company of defense, it can be lowered three degrees (Art. 64) to arresto
establish that he acted in self-defense. However, the Fleischer's family) was involved in a legal battle with the mayor.
number and nature of the stab wounds inflicted by more defendant and other land settlers of Cotabato over certain
than one person belie his theory. According to testimonies, pieces of property. At the time of the shooting, the civil case was Judgment: Defendant guilty of homicide but w/ mitigating
the attack by the assailants was unprovoked. It was also still pending for annulment (settlers wanted granting of property circumstances and extenuating circumstance of incomplete self
indicated that the stabbing was intentional. It is also negated to Fleisher and Co. to be annulled). At time of the shooting, defense. Penalty is 4 months arresto mayor and to indemnify
by the physical evidence and other circumstances, such as defendant had leased his property from Fleisher (even though each group of heirs 4,000 w/o subsidiary imprisonment and w/o
his failure to present the knife upon surrender, his failure to case pending and ownership uncertain) to avoid trouble. On award for moral damages. Appellant has already been detained
tell the police authorities that he killed the deceased in self- June 25, defendant received letter terminating contract because 14 years so his immediate release is ordered.
defense, and the absence of any injury on the body of he allegedly didn't pay rent. He was given 6 months to remove
Ongonion. Not one of the elements of self-defense is his house from the land. Shooting was barely 2 months after OPINION:
present. Appellant Ongonion's theory of self-defense is letter. Defendant claims he killed in defense of his person and Gutierrez, dissenting. Defense of property can only be invoked
therefore untenable. Minor inconsistencies in the testimony property. CFI ruled that Narvaez was guilty. Aggravating when coupled with form of attack on person defending property.
of prosecution witnesses do not affect their credibility. circumstances of evident premeditation offset by the mitigating In the case at bar, this was not so. Appellant should then be
circumstance of voluntary surrender. For both murders, CFI sentenced to prision mayor. However, since he has served more
Appellant Abagon's defense was likewise untenable, since it sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs, than that, he should be released.
can be proved that it was not physically impossible for him and to pay for moral damages. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to be at the scene of the crime Issue: WON defendant is exempt from criminal liability.
Held: No. However, crime was an incompletely justifiable crime. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. WON conspiracy can be established PEOPLE v. BOHOLST-CABALLERO
Art. 11, par 1 of the Revised Penal Code enumerates the 61 SCRA 180 (1974)
Yes. Appellants fully concurred in their actions. They came requisites of the justifying circumstance of self-defense:
to the victim one after the other and attacked him with 1.Unlawful aggression. In the case at bar, there was unlawful Facts:
undiverted purpose. They also left together. That the aggression towards appellant's property rights. Fleisher had Cunigunda Boholst Caballero seeks reversal of the judgment of
assailants acted in concerted efforts with community of given Narvaez 6 months and he should have left him in peace the CFI of Ormoc City finding her guilty of parricide—she
criminal purpose to ensure the death of the victim is before time was up, instead of chiseling Narvaez's house and allegedly killed her husband, Francisco Caballero, using a
indicative of conspiracy between them. Even if conspiracy putting up fence. Art. 536 of the Civil Code also provides that hunting knife. The couple was married in 1956 and had a
had not been established, the liability of the two appellants possession may not be acquired through force or intimidation; daughter. They had frequent quarrels due to the husband's
would not change for each inflicted on his own, multiple while Art. 539 provides that every possessor has the right to be gambling and drinking and there were times when he maltreated
stabbing blows on the victim resulting in mortal injuries. respected in his possession and abused his wife. After more than a year, Francisco
They acted as principals by direct participation. Treachery 2.Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel abandoned his family. In 1958, Cunigunda went caroling with
was likewise proven by evidence since the attack was attack. In the case, killing was disproportionate to the attack. her friends and when she was on her way home she met her
immediate, sudden and unexpected. husband who suddenly held her by the collar and accused her
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
1
of going out for prostitution. Then he said he would kill her, held shooting Pio and Severo as evidence shows he did this to
her by the hair, slapped her until her nose bled then pushed her Nature: Appeal from a judgement of the Circuit Criminal Court ensure that the killing of Geminiano happened without any risk
towards the ground. She fell to the ground, he knelt on her and of Lucena City to Pio and Severo. His malicious intention was not to avoid any
proceeded to choke her. Cunigunda, having earlier felt a knife evil from Marianito but to forestall any interference in the assault
tucked in Francisco's belt line while holding unto his waist so Facts: On the morning of January 30, 1965, Geminiano met Pio done by Pio and Severo. Even though he did not take direct part
she wouldn't fall to the ground, grabbed the hunting knife and and asked him if he could have his share of the paiay that Pio in the killing, his conspiracy with the others made him a principal
thrust it into her husband's left side, near the belt line just above harvested from tilling Geminiano's land. Pio told him to drop by too. Moreover, treachery was involved. Juan weakened the
the thigh. He died 2 days after the incident due to the stab his house anytime to get it so Geminiano said he will drop by in victim's defense by disabling Marianito and ensured the killing
wound. Then she ran home and threw the knife away. The next the afternoon with his son Marianito. without any risk to themselves. Thus, the act of one is the act of
day, she surrendered herself to the police along with the torn That afternoon, Geminiano sat outside Pio's house to wait for all, and Juan is also guilty of murder.
dress that she wore the night before. the promised palay. Pio was standing by the door of his house
Issue: WON Cunigunda, in stabbing her husband, acted in with Severo also standing by. Marianito was standing a few feet
legitimate self-defense? behind his father with a gun slung in his shoulder. Hostile, Pio PEOPLE v. DELIMA
Held: Yes, she did. Acquitted told Geminiano that he was not going to give him palay thus 46 Phil. 738 (1922)
Ratio: Geminiano remonstrated. Pio then unsheathed his bolo and -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.Burden if proof of self-defense rests on the accused. In this approached Geminiano from the left. Severo took an axe and
case, the location and nature of the stab wound confirms that approached from the right. At this, Geminiano held up his hands
the said victim, the husband, was the aggressor. and told Severo not to fight. Pio then stabbed Geminiano's neck -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
with the bolo. With Geminiano faced down on the ground, PEOPLE v. OANIS
With her husband kneeling over her and choking her, Severo hacked his back with the axe. While this was going on, 74 Phil. 257 (1943)
accused had no other choice but to pull the knife tucked in Juan suddenly embraced Marianito from behind. They grappled
his belt line and thrust it into his side. and rolled downhill where Marianito passed out. When he came -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to, he saw his mortally wounded father and carried him a short
The fact that the blow landed in the vicinity where the knife distance. Geminiano died at approximately 2pm. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
was drawn from is a strong indication of the truth of the PEOPLE v. BERONILLA
testimony of the accused. Based on the re-enactment of the Pio is a fugitive from justice in this case. Severo and Juan were 96 Phil. 566 (1955)
incident, it was natural for her to use her right hand to lunge convicted of murder and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The
the knife into husband's left side. two were also convicted of lesions leves (for Marianito). Other Nature: Appeal from the decision of the CFI of Abra, convicting
three were acquitted. Severo and Juan appealed for the murder the accused of murder.
2.Three requisites of legitimate self-defense are present conviction. They contend that Geminiano unsheathed his bolo
first so Pio met him and struck. As Geminiano turned to flee, Pio Facts: Arsenio Borjal was mayor of La Paz Abra at the outbreak
Unlawful aggression. The husband resorting to pushing struck again on the left side and thus Geminiano fell to the of war and continued to serve as mayor during the Japanese
her to the ground then choking her just because she was ground and died due to the bleeding. Marianito was embraced occupation. Dec 19, 1944 accused-appellant Manuel Beronilla
out caroling at night constitutes unlawful aggression, There by Juan because he allegedly reached for his gun and tried to was appointed Military Mayor of La Paz by LT. Col Arnold.
was imminent danger of injury. shoot Pio. With this argument, they shift the responsibility of the Simultaneously, he received a memorandum issued by Arnold
killing to Pio (who was not there and not tried - a fugitive) and authorizing them to appoint a jury of 12 bolomen to try persons
Reasonable necessity of means employed. While being that Pio was only acting in self-defense. Juan contends he was accused of treason, espionage or aiding the enemy. He also
choked, Cunigunda had no other recourse but to take hold just protecting Pio and Severo when he prevented Mariano from received a list of all puppet government officials of Abra, with a
of the knife and plunge it into husband's side in order to firing his gun. A few days after filing this appeal however, Severo memorandum instructing all Military Mayors to investigate said
protect herself. Reasonable necessity does not depend withdrew and in effect accepted prosecution's version. So, this persons and gather against them complaints. Beronilla,
upon the harm done but on the imminent danger of such appeal concerns Juan only. pursuant to his instructions placed Borjal under custody and
injury. asked residents of La Paz to file case against him. He also
Issue: WON Juan conspired with Pio and Severe in the killing of appointed a 12-man jury composed of Labuguen as chairman
Lack of sufficient provocation. provocation is sufficient Geminiano and is he deserving of reclusion perpetua? and others, plus Alverne and Balmaceda were prosecutors;
when proportionate to the aggression. In this case, there Paculdo as clerk of the jury, and Inovermo as counsel for the
was no sufficient provocation on the part of the accused Held: Yes, judgment affirmed. accused, later Atty. Ban-eras voluntarily appeared as counsel
(Cunigunda) to warrant the attack of her husband. All that for Borjal. The jury found Borjal guilty on all counts and imposed
she did to provoke an imaginary commission of a wrong in Ratio: Considering the trio's orchestrated behavior and Juan's death penalty. Mayor Beronilla forwarded the records of the
the mind of her husband was to be out caroling at night. close relationship to Pio and Severo, conclusion is that he acted case to Headquarters of Infantry for review. Records were
in conspiracy with them, planning the whole thing, from the time returned on April 18,1945 with approval of Arnold. On the same
after Pio met Geminiano in the morning to the event in the day, Beronilla ordered the execution of Borjal. Immediately after
PEOPLE v. RICOHERMOSO afternoon. He cannot invoke Article 11, par 4 (justifying the execution, Beronilla reported the execution to Arnold, the
56 SCRA 431 (1974) circumstances) in explaining his act of preventing Marianito from latter complementing Beronilla.
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
2
 TABUENA v. SANDIGANBAYAN - a crime is not commited if the mind of the person performing
Two years later, Mayor Beronillo and others involved in the 121 SCRA 389 (1983) the afct complained of is innocent (malversation cases: US v.
Borjal case were indicted by CFI of Abra for murder, for Catolico, US v. Elvina).
allegedly conspiring and confederating in the execution of Facts: 3.The Court, based on the evidence presented, found that
Borjal. Pres. Roxas issued E.P. no.8, granting amnesty to all  Following a direct order from President Marcos (to pay Tabuena had no other choice but to actually follow the order
persons who committed acts penalized, under RPC in IMMEDIATELY the sum of 55,000,000 to PNCC - amount stated in the Marcos Memorandum, because, as president of
furtherance of resistance to the enemy against persons aiding in supposedly owed by MIAA, which is the company that the Philippines, indubitably the head of governmental agencies
the war efforts of the enemy. All the accused ( except Labuguen Tabuena is a general manager of), Luis Tabuena withdrew such as the MIAA and PNCC, Marcos is undeniably the superior
who filed and granted amnesty by the AFP), filed their the sum of 55M on three separate occasions (25M, 25M, of Tabuena.
application to Second Guerilla Amnesty Commission, which 5M - with Adoifo Peralta) and delivered them to Fe Roa- 4.Tabuena entitled to the justifying circumstance of "any person
denied their application on the ground that they were inspired by Gimenez, the private secretary of President Marcos. who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some
purely personal motives, thus remanding case to CFI for trial on  It is without dispute that Tabuena did not follow the normal lawful purpose/' because he is only acting in good faith, faithfully
merits. On July 10, 1950 Beronillo, Paculdo, Velasco and procedures in withdrawal and delivery of the money (no and efficiently carrying out orders from the highest official in the
Adriatico were convicted as conspirator and co-principals of disbursement slips and paid in cold cash). land. Moreover, there was nothing in the Marcos Memorandum
crime murder. They appealed.  Tabuena was only issued a receipt after the third delivery that may invite suspicion - there was no question about the
and it did not mention anything about the money being lawfulness of the order contained in such a memorandum.
Issue: WON accused appellants are guilty of murder; and WON used to pay PNCC, but merely acknowledged the fact that Tabuena had reason to believe that the 55M was indeed part of
they should be granted amnesty. Gimenez had received the sum of 55M from Tabuena on a due and demandable debt, a portion of a bigger liability to
three occasions. Furthermore, there was no receipt from PNCC (existence of such debts determined from testimonies).
Held/Ratio: The records are ample to show that Beronilla acted the PNCC recognizing payment of debt. So even if the order was illegal and Tabuena was not aware of
pursuant to the orders of the Infantry Headquarters. Although it  PROSECUTION: there were no standing obligations in the illegality, he would not be liable because there would only be
was alleged by the state that there was a radiogram from certain favor of the PNCC at the time of disbursement of 55M a mistake of fact committed in good faith.
Col. Volkmann to Lt. Col. Arnold, on the illegality of Borjal's  TABUENA: he was merely complying with the direct order 5.Tabuena followed the memorandum to the letter, paying
execution, there are no sufficient evidence to show that it was of Marcos (plus the MARCOS memorandum which immediately the PNCC, through this office (office of the
known to Beronilla. Furthermore, the messages of Col. Arnold contained same order) to IMMEDIATELY forward to the president) the sum of 55M. Tabuena had reasonable ground to
approving the decisions of Beronilla prove otherwise. The office of the President, 55M in cash, as partial payment of believe that the President was entitled to receive the money
testimony of Rafael Balmaceda, relative of Borjal was also MIAA's obligations to PNCC and that he believed that because as Chief Executive, Marcos exercised supervision and
unreliable. MIAA indeed had those liabilities to PNCC. In short, that control over governmental agencies (good faith in the payment
Tabuena acted in good faith. of public funds relieves a public officer from the crime of
The state claims that the appellants held grudges against late malversation).
 Sandiganbayan rejected Tabuena's claim of good faith and
Borjal, but court said that the conduct of the appellants does not 6.While even Tabuena admitted that procedures were ignored
found him guilty of malversation, hence this case.
dispose that they were impelled by malice. In fact, prior to the and that the disbursement was unusual, he is found to be
execution, Beronilla sent the decision for review. The lower excused from such because the Marcos Memorandum enjoined
Issue: WON Tabuena, in following the orders of his superior,
court also found that Borjal was really guilty of treasonable acts. his IMMEDIATE COMPLIANCE. On the other hand, while this
was guilty of malversation (or if because of the justifying
The court held that the accused-appellants just acted upon the allows for the negation of criminal intent, as Tabuena acted in
circumstance of following the orders of his superior, in good
orders of superiors and criminal intent was not established. good faith, he would still be civilly liable (but he's not criminally
faith, he would not be criminally liable, but merely civilly liable)?
liable anymore, escaping the harsher penalties) (see page 362).
Even assuming the accused-appellant are guilty of murder, they 7.There is no showing that Tabuena had anything to do with the
Held: Tabuena is merely civilly liable. The very fact that he was
should not be denied of the amnesty on the ground that the creation of the Marcos Memorandum - that even if the real
merely following the orders of his superior is a justifying
slaying took place after actual liberation of the area from enemy purpose behind the memorandum was to get 55M from public
circumstance.
control. The court held that any reasonable doubt as to whether funds, it is clear that he did and would not profit from such and
a given case falls within the amnesty proclamation shall be that he did not have anything to do with the creation of the
Ratio:
resolved in favor of the accused. memorandum.
1.On the point raised by Tabuena that he cannot be charged
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8.Tabuena case is a case concerning obedience in good faith of
with intentional malversation and be convicted by malversation
a duly executed order. The order/memorandum came from the
by negligence, the Court ruled that the dolo and culpa of the
OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT and bears the signature of the
offense is only a modality in the perpetration of the felony. The
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- president himself, in effect allowing for the presumption that
same felony is still there and conviction thereof is proper.
NASSIF v. PEOPLE such order was regularly issued and patently legal.
2.on the DEFENSE OF GOOD FAITH: it is a valid defense
73 Phil. 67 (1946) Furthermore, the wording of the memorandum expressed a
against malversation because it would negate criminal intent. To
certain urgency to its execution. -Obedienta est legis essential
constitute a crime, the act must, except in certain crimes...be
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (act swiftly without question).
accompanied by criminal intent or such negligence or
9.Court also believes that the case involves a violation of the
indifference to duty or to consequences asis equivalent to
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- accused's right to due process in the sense that it was obvious
criminal intent The maxim actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
3
that the Sandiganbayan was overzealous in its attempt to later), which is more than enough time to comply with the court to allow accused-appellant, to be treated at the Baguio
convict parties involved - as seen in the volume of questions procedure. He also adds that if there was not enough time, General Hospital to determine whether he should remain in jail
asked, and the manner the same were posed (cross Tabuena should have asked for more time or at least or be transferred to some other institution. While motion for
examinations characteristic of confrontation, probing and communicated such problems to the president. Moreover, to reconsideration was pending, counsel for accused-appellant
insinuation). To quote Justice Cruz: Respect for the Constitution acquit the petitioners imply that people believe that the filed a "Motion to Confine Accused for Physical, Mental and
is more important that securing a conviction based on a violation president is always right, that he or she can do no wrong - that Psychiatric Examination." Appellant's counsel informed the court
of the rights of the accused. Sandiganbayan was obviously the president is above and beyond the law. that accused-appellant had been exhibiting abnormal behavior
biased, denying Tabuena and parties involves the requirement for the past weeks. There were 2 letters of the warden
of the cold neutrality of an impartial judge. PANGANIBAN: requesting the same. The trial court denied reconsideration of
He is of the same view as Romero, Davide and Puno but also the order denying the "Demurrer to Evidence." Dr. Maria
DECISION: Tabuena and Peralta acquitted. raises some points: the defense of obedience to a superior's Soledad Gawidan, a resident physician in the Department of
order is already obsolete, as determined by the Tribunal in Psychiatry at the Baguio General Hospital, testified to the
DISSENTING OPINION Nuremberg, in its judgment against Nazi war criminals who put accused being confined and diagnosed with "Schizophrenic
I recommend you read them in relation to justifying up the defense that they were merely following orders. The Psychosis, Paranoid Type—schizophrenia, paranoid, chronic,
circumstances in the RPC because it would help a lot. Anyhoo, tribunal said that the true test did not lie with the existence of an paranoid type."
for the dissents, I'll be only concentrating on the parts relevant order but whether a moral choice was in fact, possible. To allow
to the location of the case in the outline in relation to article 11. this defense to hold in the Tabuena case sets a dangerous The trial court rendered a decision on June 23, 1997. It upheld
To quote Prof Te: Ladies and gentlemen, there is a reason why precedent in the country because it would deprive the Courts the prosecution evidence and found accused-appellant guilty of
the outline was constructed the way it is. There is a reason why the moral authority to convict any subordinate because he or the crime charged and thereby sentenced him to death,
those cases are there under different headings. While this is not she was "merely following the orders of the his or her superior
exactly what he said, medyo malapit na rin. Anyway, ayun. © (allowing the same doctrine to be invoked in similar criminal Issue: WON he was indeed insane
cases before the SC and even in the inferior courts who have no
DAVIDE: choice but to follow the doctrines set by the SC). When a person commits a felonious act the act is presumed to
Davide disagrees with majority that all the requisites of the sixth have been done voluntarily. In the absence of evidence to the
justifying circumstance in art 11 of the RPC were present The ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- contrary, the law presumes that every person is of sound mind
sixth circumstance of the said article implies 3 things: a) that the and that all acts are voluntary. An insane person is exempt from
order was issued by a superior; b) such order must be for some criminal liability unless he has acted during a lucid interval. In
lawful purpose and; c) means used by subordinate to carry out ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- the eyes of the law, insanity exists when there is a complete
said order must be lawful. According to Davide, facts show that PEOPLE v. ESTRADA deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. Mere
the debt was only 34.5M so order of Marcos had excess of 333 SCRA 699 (2000) abnormality of the mental faculties will not exclude imputability.
20.5M - said order then had no factual or legal basis and Since the presumption is always in favor of sanity, he who
UNLAWFUL. Automatic review of the death penalty invokes insanity as an exempting circumstance must prove it by
clear and positive evidence. There are certain circumstances
ROMERO: Facts: December 27, 1994, at the St. John's Cathedral, that should have placed the trial court on notice that appellant
He also believes that not all requisites were present to warrant a Dagupan City, while the sacrament of confirmation was being may not have been in full possession of his mental faculties e.g.
justifying circumstance as Tabuena, by his own admission, did performed by the Bishop, a man from the crowd walked towards when he attacked Mararac, then went up the mic. (weirdo
not follow standard operating procedures (no vouchers, no the center of the altar and sat on the Bishop's chair. Crisanto naman diba).
approval by Commission on Audit, non-issuance of a receipt in Santillan, who was an assistant saw this. He requested the
1st 2 deliveries, non-issuance of receipt by PNCC, delivery to accused to vacate, but the latter refused. They called on the Accused-appellant's history of mental illness was brought to the
office of Gimenez [not office in Malacanang], a stranger to guard. Despite repeated request, he did not move. As the guard courts
contract between PNCC and MIAA). The entire process, done was attempting to strike the victim with his nightstick to make
with haste and with a total disregard of appropriate auditing him leave accused-appellant drew a knife and stabbed Mararac. To test whether the accused would have a fair trial there are
requirements was not based on normal procedure. Tabuena's He repeated it a lot. After, he got up and shouted via the mic; No two distinct matters to be determined (1) whether defendant is
rank does not excuse him from ignoring such. one can beat me here! SPO1 Francisco saw a man, with red coherent to provide his counsel with information necessary (2)
stains on his shirt and a knife in one hand sitting on a chair. He whether he is able to comprehend the significance of the trial
PUNO: advised him to drop the knife. Accused-appellant obeyed, and his relation to it. To put a legally incompetent person on trial
He concentrates on the case involving a mistake in fact, citing Mararac, the security guard, was brought to the hospital where or to convict and sentence him is a violation of the constitutional
the Ah CHong case among others, and discussing article 3 in he expired a few minutes upon arrival. rights to a fair trial. The determination of whether a sanity
some detail -saying that mistake in fact should not excuse the investigation or hearing should be ordered rests generally in the
accused from incurring liability. It was also clear from the facts Accused-appellant, filed a "Demurrer to Evidence" where he discretion of the trial court. In the case at bar, when accused-
that it took one month for Tabuena to comply with order (starting claims that: prosecution failed to prove murder; that there was appellant moved for suspension of the arraignment on the
from the time Marcos called him up by phone - to which the unlawful aggression by the victim; and that accused-appellant ground of accused's mental condition, the trial court denied the
memorandum containing the same orders followed a week was of unsound mind. Inspector Valdez (Jail warden) requested motion after finding that the questions propounded on appellant
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
4
were intelligently answered by him. The fact that accused- doctors found him fit to stand trial. After his release, he pleaded Nature: Appeal from a decision of the RTC Burgos, Pangasinan
appellant was able to answer the questions asked by the trial insanity as a defense, which was disregarded. The only issue to
court is not conclusive evidence that he was competent enough be resolved is whether accused-appellant was insane during the Facts: Ferdinand Madarang y Magno was charged with
to stand trial and assist in his defense. The trial court took it commission of the crimes as would exempt him from criminal parricide for the killing of his wife Lilia Madarang and was
solely upon itself to determine the sanity of accused-appellant. liability. sentenced to reclusion perpetua. He claims that he was
The trial judge is not a psychiatrist or psychologist or some suffering from a mental illness at the time he committed the
other expert equipped with the specialized knowledge. If the Held: Court was not convince that he was insane during the felony, and as such, should not be held liable. They have 7
medical history was not enough to create a reasonable doubt in commission of the crime since the evaluation did not say so in children and she was pregnant with her eighth child. He
the judge's mind of accused-appellant's competency to stand unequivocal terms. Dr. Zalsos was unsure when she testified. In worked abroad as a seaman for 16 years. Afterwards, he set up
trial, subsequent events should have done so. One month after order that insanity can be considered as an exempting a hardware store here in the Phils. The business failed and he
the prosecution rested its case, there were letters requesting circumstance, it must be shown to exist just before or during the lost his entire fortune due to cockfighting. They were forced to
that accused be confined in hospital, as well as the counsel's commission of the offense. It must be shown beyond doubt that stay in the house of Avelina Mirador, Lilia's mother because he
filing of motion. And despite all the overwhelming indications of there was complete deprivation of reason or discernment and could no longer support his family.
accused-appellant's state of mind, the judge persisted in his freedom of the will at the time of the commission of the crime,
personal assessment and never even considered subjecting which the accused failed to prove. Sept 3, 1993 - he and Lilia had a squabble. He was jealous of
accused-appellant to a medical examination. To top it all, the  Insanity is evinced by a deranged and perverted condition another man and he was accusing her of infidelity. In the heat
judge found appellant guilty and sentenced him to death! of the mental faculties which is manifested in language and of the fight and in the presence of their children, he stabbed her,
conduct. An insane person has no full and clear resulting in her untimely death.
Held: At this late hour, a medical finding alone may make it understanding of the nature and consequences of his acts.
impossible for us to evaluate appellant's mental condition at the We are convinced that accused-appellant was sane at the Avelina testified that she saw the accused emerge from the
time of the crime's commission for him to avail of the exempting time he perpetrated the killings. The following house holding a bolo. She ran for safety; During the period he
circumstance of insanity. Nonetheless, under the present circumstances clearly point to saneness. (a) Immediately stayed in her house, she did not notice anything peculiar in hi
circumstances, accused-appellant's competence to stand trial surrendering to the Police; (b) He showed remorse during behavior that would suggest he was suffering from any mental
must be properly ascertained to enable him to participate in his his confinement; (c) Gave a Sworn Statement before the illness.
trial meaningfully. Remanded to the court a quo for the conduct Prosecutor's Office after the crimes narrating the incident
of a proper mental examination on accused-appellant, a (admit that he was of sound mind). These are hardly the Dr. Wilson Tibayan declared that Madarang was committed to
determination of his competency to stand trial, and for further acts of a person with a sick mind. the National Center or Medical Helath (NCMH) on July 1994
proceedings.  The law presumes every man to be of sound mind. Thus, a upon the order of the court to determine the fitness of the
person accused of a crime who pleads the exempting accused to stand trial. The NCMH conducted three medical and
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- circumstance of insanity has the burden of proving it. psychiatric evaluations of the accused during his stay there.
 The defense banks heavily on the findings of the He was diagnosed to be suffering from schizophrenia. He also
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- psychiatrists. Doctors did not say that he was totally insane testified that it was highly possible that the accused was
PEOPLE v. VILLA JR. to warrant conclusion that he was insane enough to kill all suffering from schizophrenia prior to his commission of the
331 SCRA 142 (2000) those people. We agree with the trial court that the results crime.
of the examinations conducted by the psychiatrists on
Nature: Appeal to decision of RTC that convicted him of 4 accused-appellant appear to be based on incomplete or Schizophrenia is a type of psychosis, which is characterized by
murders. insufficient facts. Records show that the psychiatrists relied impaired fundamental reasoning delusions, hallucinations, etc.
mainly on the data supplied by accused-appellant and his The patient may be incapable of distinguishing right from wrong
Facts: Dionito Fernandez was cutting grass when his neighbor police escort. It could be that he was insane while being or know what he is doing. He may become destructive or have
Rodolfo Villa, Jr., a member of the CAFGU came out with his M- evaluated and was contacted during his detention prior a propensity to attack if his hallucinations are violent. However,
i Garand rifle and shot Dionito killing him instantly (discovered trial, maybe due to guilt or realizations. To be a defense it a schizophrenic may have lucid intervals during which he may
later that Dionito accused him of stealing chickens). Ronald and has to be there when crime was commissioned. be able to distinguish right from wrong.
Sheila, children of Dionito, rushed out and was also shot. Sheila  There should be no aggravating circumstance just because
was only shot in the thigh and tummy. Samuel Eclevia, he was from CAFGU and had a M-l Grand Rifle. May 1996 - Madarang's third psychiatric evaluation showed that
attempted to wrestle the rifle but was also gunned down. Villa Jr. his mental condition had considerably improved. He was
surrendered and was charged with multiple murder. He pleaded Court affirms decision with a modification in penalties. discharged from the hospital and recommitted to jail to stand
not guilty and invoked self defense (says that Dionito was ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- trial.
charging at him with a bolo). His new lawyer (he changed He was convicted by the trial court as his evidence failed to
lawyers in the middle) moved for a psychiatric examination and refute the presumption of sanity at the time he committed the
it was granted. He was confined in the Mental Hospital for ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- offense.
evaluation (for insanity) for a month which resulted in the finding PEOPLE v. MADARANG He contends that at the time he stabbed his wife he was
of Insanity or Psychosis classified as Schizophrenia. He was 332 SCRA 99 (2000) completely deprived of intelligence, making his criminal act
found to be incompetent to stand trial. After 6 months, the
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
5
involuntary. His unstable state of mind could allegedly be of his will which would enable him to prevent himself from Issue: WON the accused, invoking insanity, can claim
deduced from the ff: doing the act, then he cannot be found guilty." exemption from liability for the crime he committed
 He had no recollection of the stabbing. Hence, he was
completely unaware of his acts and must have committed Criticisms: Held: No
the acts with the least discernment.  It is too restrictive as it covers only impulsive acts
 His behavior at the time of the stabbing proved he was  The "irresistible" requirement is also restrictive as it Ratio:
then afflicted with schizophrenia. He did not seem to requires absolute impairment of the freedom of the  None of the witnesses presented by the accused declared
recognize anybody and this is peculiar to persons who are will which cases are very rare. that he exhibited any of the many symptoms associated
insane because a sane person who just committed a crime  It will not serve the purpose of criminal law to deter with schizophrenia immediately before or simultaneous
would have appeared remorseful and repentant after criminals as the will to resist commission of the with the stabbing incident.
realizing that what he did was wrong. crime will not be encouraged.  Although Dr. Tibayan opined that it was highly probable
 He relies on Dr, Tibayan's opinion that there was a high  It is difficult to prove whether the act was the result that the accused was already insane before the
possibility that he was already suffering from schizophrenia of an insane, irresistible impulse. commission of the crime, he also said that schizophrenics
prior to his commission of the crime, have lucid intervals during which they are capable of
 He also claims that the fact that he and his wife never 3.Durham "product" test: "an accused is not criminally distinguishing right from wrong.
engaged in a fight prior to the day he killed her must be responsible if his unlawful act was the product of mental  His claim that he had no recollection of the stabbing
considered. The change in his behavior, when he disease or defect" incident amounts only to a mere general denial that can be
uncharacteristically quarreled with his wife and turned made with facility.
violent on her, confirms that he was insane when he Criticisms:  The fact that Avelina and her nephew were frightened at
committed the crime. He urges that he had no motive to kill  Gave too much protection to the accused the sight of him holding a bolo does not, in any way, prove
his pregnant spouse. Jealousy is not a sufficient reason.  Mere testimony of a psychiatrist that the accused's that he was insane at that time.
act was the result of a mental disease would leave  His non-repentant attitude after he stabbed his wife cannot
An act done by a person in a state of insanity cannot be the court with no choice but to accept it as fact be an indication of his insanity because even criminals of
punished as an offense, This is rooted on the moral assumption sound mental condition can be non-remorseful.
of criminal law. Man is endowed with free will and reason. The 4.ALI "substantial capacity" test: a person is not responsible  The fact that he and his wife never quarreled did not prove
consent of the will is that which renders human actions laudable for his criminal act if, as a result of the mental disease or his insanity.
or culpable. Hence, when there is a defect of the deect, he tacks substantial capacity to appreciate the  It cannot be said that jealousy is not a sufficient reason to
understanding, there can be no free act of the will. criminality of his act or to conform his conduct to kill a pregnant spouse.
requirements of the law.  The accused attributes his loss of insanity on his bad
For your own personal delectation u fortune. This is purely speculative and unsupported by
 Various tests used to determine insanity: Criticisms: record.
1.M'Naughten Rule: "to establish a defense on the ground  Use of ambiguous words like "substantial capacity"  Avelina testified that during his stay in her house, she did
of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of and "appreciate" not notice any abnormal or irregular behavior on the part of
committing the act, the party accused was laboring under  Excludes psychopaths or persons whose the accused that could have suggested that he was insane.
such a defect of reason from disease of the mind, as not to abnormalities are manifested only by repeated  Since he had already admitted to committing the crime but
know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he criminal conduct pleaded not guiity on the ground of insanity, he is tried on
did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was the issue of insanity alone and if he is found to be sane, a
wrong." 5.Appreciation test (used in US federal courts): relies on the judgment of conviction is rendered without any trial on the
cognitive test; shifts the burden of proof to the defense, issue of guilt.
Criticisms: limited the scope of expert testimony, eliminated the
 ambiguous - meaning of the words "wrong" and defense of diminished capacity and provided for Judgment: decision of the trial court convicting the appellant of
"know" commitment of accused found to be insane the crime of parricide is AFFIRMED in to to.
 based on an obsolete concept of insanity as only PEOPLE v. BAÑEZ
affecting intellectual faculties and not the whole  However, in the Philippine courts, there must be a 301 SCRA 248 (1999)
personality including the patient's will and complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act.
emotions. Reason is only one of the elements of a The accused is deprived of reason; he acted without the Nature: Appeal from a decision of the RTC of Urdaneta,
personality. least discernment because there is a complete absence of Pangasinan
the power to discern or that there is a total deprivation of
2.Irresistible Impulse test: "assuming defendant's the will. Mere abnormality of the mental faculties will not Facts:
knowledge of the nature and quality of his act and exclude imputability.  Wilfredo Bañez was found by the RTC to be guilty beyond
knowledge that the act is wrong, if, by reason of disease of reasonable doubt of parricide for the killing of his father,
the mind, defendant has been deprived of or lost the power

TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A

/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
6
 Bernardo Bañez, and sentenced him to suffer the penalty  No. 3. WON the trial court gravely erred in imposing the death
of death.  Accused must prove that he was completely deprived penalty upon the accused instead of reclusion perpetua on
 Accused was living with in his parents' house. On August of reason when he killed his father in order to be the assumption that he was sane at the time of the killing.
14, 1994, his sisters, Elvira Bañez-Bustamante and considered exempt from criminal liability
Emelinda Bañez-Antiado came to the house because their  In People vs. Formigones: "it is necessary that there  No.
father complained that the accused made trouble be a complete deprivation of intelligence in committing  Under RA 7659, the penalty for parricide is reclusion
whenever drunk. the act; that the accused be deprived of reason; that perpetua to death. Since in this case there was neither
 They were discussing the plan for putting up the accused there be no responsibility for his own acts; that he acts aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, the lesser
in another house or sleeping quarters. Afterwards, the without the least discernment; that there be a complete penalty of reclusion perpetua should be imposed.
accused, who looked drunk because he was red in the absence of power to discern...insanity at the time of
face, ran into the kitchen, got 2 knives, went into his the commission of the act should absolutely deprive a Judgment: the decision of the RTC is AFFIRMED with the
father's room and stabbed him. Elvira tried to take away person of intelligence or freedom of will, because mere MODIFICATION that the accused-appellant is sentenced to
the knives but he lunged at her and stabbed he. Emelinda abnormality of his mental faculties does not exclude suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua
also tried to stop him. He chased her while Elvira locked imputability." People vs. Rafanan, Jr: "Formigoens
herself in their father's room. After the accused had left, established 2 distinguishable tests: (a) the test of -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
she rushed their father to the hospital but he was already cognition...and (b) the test of volition..But our caselaw
dead. shows common reliance on the test of cognition, rather PEOPLE v. CAÑETA
 The accused entered a plea of insanity. than on a test relating to 'freedom of the will.'" 309 SCRA 199 (1999)
 Elvira testified that the accused had been staying in their  Burden to prove his insanity at the time of the
father's house for 4 years after the accused separated from commission of the act rests on the defense. But he Nature: Appeal of the decision of the Regional Trial Court,
his wife; that he was confined at the Bicutan Rehabilitation was not able to prove beyond reasonable doubt his Manila, Branch 49, convicting Edwin Cañeta and Antonio Abes
Center for addiction to gasoline and was discharged; that insanity at the time immediately preceding the killing or of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide and
he was also treated at the Baguio General Hospital for at the very moment of the killing. Evidence merely sentencing each of them to reclusion perpetua, pay the heirs of
addiction to gasoline, and; that he had not shown any consisted of the testimony of his mother regarding his the deceased the amount of P30,000.00, as moral and
indication that he was crazy. Dr. Gerona III of the NCMH treatments. The testimony of Dr. Gerona III is exemplary damages, and P17,200.00, as actual damages and
(National center for Mental Health) testified that accused inconclusive as to whether the accused was insane at to return to Munoz Surpresa Grande P50,00.00. This is a
was admitted to the NCMH 20 days after the crime; that the time immediately preceding the killing or at the very consolidation of two separate criminal cases filed against Edwin
the accused was suffering from schizophrenia, described moment of the killing. He could not have testified to and Antonio for the crime committed against Teodorico Munoz
as a mental disorder characterized by thought this effect, considering that he treated the accused
disturbances, hallucination, suspiciousness, and after the accused was confine at the NCMH. Facts: Oct. 21, 1981 - Teodorico Munoz went to work as the
deterioration in areas of work, social relations and self- delivery man of a door-to-door service of cash money of the firm
care; that schizophrenia can be caused by use of 2. WON there exists the aggravating circumstances of Munoz Surpresa Grande. He had with him P50, 000.00 to be
substances (inhaling gasoline and alcoholism); that he intoxication and dwelling in the commission of the crime delivered to clients, but he was held up by two men, later
could not say whether the accused was insane at the time identified as Edwin and Antonio. Edwin stabbed him while
he committed the crime.  No. Antonio grabbed the bag with the cash inside, the two ran in
 Marina Gabel-Banez, mother of the accused, testified that  Dwelling cannot be considered aggravating because opposite directions. Edwin was caught by the mob while Antonio
he had been confined for more than a year at the Bicutan accused and his father were living in the same house escaped, but he was positively identified by two witnesses. Both
rehab Center; that he was also treated at the Baguio where the crime was committed. The rationale for plead not guilty to the charges against them.
General hospital; that after killing his father, he was considering dwelling as an aggravating circumstance is
confined at the Mandaluyong mental hospital for treatment; the violation by the offender of the sanctity of the home In the trial, Edwin averred that he be examined by experts of the
that his wife left him and he blamed his in-laws for his of the victim by trespassing therein to commit the National Center for Mental Health to determine whether he was
marital troubles; that he resorted to gasoline to forget his crime. The reason is entirely absent in this case. mentally fit to undergo the rigors of trial. The trial court granted
problems, and; that he was not a drunkard. Regarding the aggravating circumstance of the motion and ordered the suspension of trial pending
 The trial court found him guilty of parricide with the intoxication, it has not been shown that it is habitual or submission by the Director, National Center for Mental Health,
aggravating circumstance of dwelling and habitual intentional as required by Art 15 of the RPC. Even of his report, which said that he was mentally fit. The defense
intoxication and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of assuming that the accused was drunk at the time he was that Edwin was suffering from drug psychosis, therefore he
death committed the crime, it was not shown that he is a should be exempted from the criminal liability. The trial court
habitual and excessive drinker or that he intentionally however convicted both as principals of the crime committed
Issues: got drunk. Neither can intoxication be mitigating and sentenced them (see above "nature").
1. WON he was insane at the time of the commission of the because there is no showing that he accused was so
crime and should be exempt from criminal liability under drunk that his will power was impaired or that he could Issues:
Art. 12 of the RPC. not comprehend the wrongfulness of his acts. 1.WON Edwin was insane at the time of the crime

TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A

/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
7
  No, he wasn't. The report of the National Center for  Francis Bart invited his brother to go to Pier 4 but Felbart  The crime committed was still murder even w/o the
Mental Health and the testimony of Dr. Perfecto D. refused qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation
Chua Cheng III do not prove insanity of accused-  When Francis Bart did not return by the afternoon of the because there was Treachery and abuse of superior
appellant Edwin Caneta. The burden of proof lies on following day, his parents got worried and started to look strength, either of which would qualify the crime as
the defense, but they were not able to prove the for him. murder
insanity of Edwin. The defense of insanity requires that  Dec. 4, 1996 - the police received a report that a body of a
the accused suffered from a complete deprivation of young boy 10-11 yrs old had been found at the Bulacao Treachery or alevosia
reason in committing the act. The accused must be bridge "sickening state of nudity & physical abuse" face  when a crime vs. persons is committed employing
completely deprived of reason. There must be no was covered with a big stone in an apparent attempt to means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof w/c
consciousness of responsibility for his acts, or that hide the body. The autopsy showed: tend directly and specially to insure its execution, w/o
there be complete absence of the power to discern. o cause of death: intercranial hemorrhage risk to himself arising from the defense w/c the
The defense of insanity or imbecility must be clearly o other findings: contusions, abrasions and lacerations offended party might make (Art. 14(16) RPC)
proved. The law presumes every man to be sane. all over the body; head fracture; multiple lacerations in  The killing of children who by reason of their tender
his rectum (doctor's opinion: caused by a blunt years cannot be expected to put up a defense =
2.WON the testimony of witness Evangeline, who identified instrument like a fully erect penis) attended by treachery even if manner of attack is not
Antonio Abes as one of the assailants called "Tony Gil", should  Dec. 9, 1996: a man (later identified as Diaz) went to precisely shown. (People v. Gonzales citing People v.
be given credence Francis Bart's funeral and caused a commotion, reciting Valerio, Jr.)
 Yes. He was positively identified by eyewitness poems, and singing the theme from The Lion King  Therefore, the killing of Francis Bart must be deemed
Evangeline Mico. The positive identification of a (emphasizing the word "surrender" Francis Bart’s father ipso facto qualified by treachery because of his
malefactor may not be disregarded just because his Bartolome went to the police to report the incident; the inherent defenselessness. (People v, Bacalto)
name was not known to the witness. For the police went to the Fulache residence to observe the man,
eyewitness account is premised on the fact that the and later invited him to head quarters for further Abuse of Superior Strength
witness saw the accused commit the crime, and not observation and questioning; the man went with them  blatant inequality of strength between Diaz and the boy
because the witness knew his name The trial court, voluntarily  But cannot be appreciated even as generic
which had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of  After being apprised of his constitutional rights in Cebuano aggravating circumstance being necessarily absorbed
Evangeline was convinced of her trustworthiness. "The in the presence of policemen, Atty. Abellanosa and in treachery
time-tested doctrine is that a trial court's assessment of mediamen, Diaz narrated in full detail how he perpetrated
the credibility of a witness is entitled to great weight the crime (Declared inadmissible by RTC - Atty. Therefore, the crime that was committed is murder.
even conclusive and binding on the Court, if not tainted Abellanosa, who assisted Diaz during custodial
with arbitrariness or oversight of some fact or investigation was not Diaz' independent counsel) 2.WON the death penalty should be imposed
circumstance of weight and influence."
 Reenactment of the crime was also done in the presence
of mediamen, published in Sun Star Daily, unauthenticated  "[Diaz] should not be meted the supreme penalty of
Decision: Judgment affirmed, with the MODIFICATION that the death."
copy presented in court was declared inadmissible but
indemnity is raised to P50,000.00, in line with current rulings.
court took judicial notice just the same  The Information charged Diaz only with murder
 Diaz tried to establish the defense of insanity but Dr. qualified by treachery, abuse of superior strength and
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wilson Tibayan (Diaz' witness, gov't physician connected evident premeditation; failed to mention the
with the National Center for Mental Health) testified that commission of sexual abuse or sodomy the
PEOPLE v. DIAZ
Diaz was diagnosed with Pedophilia, not insanity Information designated the crime as "murder in relation
320 SCRA 168 (1999)
 Pedophilia – a sexual disorder wherein the subject has to RA 7610" but the actual recital of facts in the
strong, recurrent and uncontrollable fantasies which he complaint or information failed to mention the sexual
Nature: Automatic review of an April 11, 1997 Cebu City RTC
tries to fulfill, especially, when there are no people around abuse or sodomy
decision which found Diaz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
murder in relation to sexual abuse (sodomy) of a child attended o Person can still distinguish right from wrong  As a rule, what controls is not the designation of the
by treachery, sentenced him to death. Ordered him to pay the o Killing not necessary although injuries may be inflicted offense but its actual description in the complaint or
heirs of the victim: Php 50,000 (death indemnity); 250,000 on the victim in an effort to repel any resistance information. The real nature of the criminal charge
(moral damages); 100,000 (exemplary damages); 40,000 o Diaz did what he did in revenge bee. as a child, he was cannot be determined from the caption or preamble of
(funeral expenses) also a victim of sexual abuse the information of from the mere reference to a
particular provision of law alleged to have been
Facts: Issues, Held, Ratio violated because they are conclusions of law.
 Dec. 3, 1996 - around 8pm, Francis Bart Fulache (11), his 1.WON the crime committed was murder
Therefore, even if there is positive proof of sexual abuse,
brother Felbart (10), and Diaz (30), a friend Francis Bart
 Yes. Diaz cannot be convicted therefor because such was not
knew from the hantakan, a gaming place near their store,
alleged in the actual recital of facts in the Information.
went to Pier 3 to defecate.
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
8
 4.WON the trial court erred in not appreciating Andres' voluntary
3.WON Diaz was sane at the time of commission of act Facts: June - October 1982, Aiberto was confined in the surrender
 Diaz failed to overcome the legal presumption of National Mental Hospital for schizophreniform disorder, where  Yes, it should have been credited in favor of Andres.
sanity. he was subsequently released. Relatives say that his condition Andres surrendered an hour after the incident to Col.
 When Diaz was confined at the National Center for did not seem to improve. He was referred to Dr. Adigue for Faltado then to the Batangas Police Station. Evidence
Mental Health, he was diagnosed with pedophilia, not further examinations. May 20, 1991, 11 pm, a party was is sufficient to establish voluntary surrender:
insanity. attended by both Andres and Alberto, as well as Larry Andal, 1.offender was not actually arrested
 Pedophilia is not insanity; Pedophilia is a sexual where the both Andres and Alberto danced the chacha together. 2.he surrendered to a person in authority or to an agent
disorder wherein the subject has strong, recurrent and Afterwards, Andres invited Larry to go home, with Andres of a person in authority]
uncontrollable fantasies which he tries to fulfill, esp. walking in front of Larry. They were waylaid by Alberto who 3.his surrender was voluntary
when there are no people around, But the person can stabbed Andres. Andres fell down and the two grappled on the
still distinguish right from wrong. ground. Andres was able to run away but he was chased and Decision: Voluntary surrender diminished penalty to prision
 A defendant in a criminal case who interposes the once more stabbed repeatedly by Alberto. Larry was so stunned mayor in its maximum period as minimum, and reclusion
defense of mental incapacity has the burden of that he was not able to help Andres, who was brought DOA to temporal in its maximum period as maximum.
establishing that fact, i.e. he was insane at the very the hospital.
moment when the crime was committed. He must Other notes:
prove it by clear and positive evidence. (People v. The trial court convicted Alberto of murder and said that his Art. 12, par. 1 RPC requires complete deprivation of rationality
Bascos) defense of insanity is not meritorious since Dr. Adigue was not in committing the act, i.e. that the accused be deprived of
 In the case at bar, the defense of insanity as an qualified as an expert witness, that his sister's testimony did not reason, that there be no consciousness of responsibility for his
exempting circumstance was not established and did constitute sufficient proof of insanity, and that he was actually acts, or that there is a complete absence of power to discern.
not overcome the legal presumption that a person's mentally agile during trial. The doctor's report did not support the claim that Alberto could
acts are of his own free will and intelligence. not distinguish right from wrong.
Issue:
Therefore, Diaz was sane at the time of commission of the 1.WON Alberto was insane therefore exempt from criminal Also, the defense of insanity must be clearly proved. The
crime liability presumption of law, per Art. 800, CC, always lies in favor of
sanity, and in the absence of proof to the contrary, every person
Judgment: Modified  No, he wasn't, and the decision was not based on the is presumed to be of sound mind.
qualifications of Dr. Adigue as a doctor but as a
RTC SUPREME COURT witness. What mattered was the failure of Dr. Adigue's Care must be taken to distinguish between insanity or lack of
testimony to establish the legal insanity of Alberto as reason and failure to use reason or good judgment due to
Crime Murder in relation to Murder
shown in the results of the tests she conducted which extreme anger or passion.
sexual abuse
merely says that Alberto has a mild depression and
(sodomy) of a child
emotional disturbances. The testimony also did not Moral insanity or mere mental depravity – results not from the
attended by treachery
establish the complete deprivation of reason on disease of the mind but from a perverted condition of the moral
Sentence death Reclusion perpetua
Alberto's part. system; person is sane and is not exempted from the criminal
Damages 50,000 – death 50,000 – death indemnity
liability
indemnity 100,000 – moral damages*
2.WON there was treachery in the act committed as appreciated
250,000 – moral 25,000 – exemplary
by the trial court. Philippine case law relies on the test of cognition which requires
damages damages
 Yes, there was. Alberto waited on the road and a complete deprivation of intelligence and not only the will in
100,000 – exemplary 40,000 – funeral expenses
waylaid the victim, an attack which was sudden and committing the criminal act.
damages
unexpected, and the means employed ensured that its
40,000 – funeral *purpose is to compensate
execution is without risk to the assailant arising from -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
expenses them for the damages to
any defense that the victim might make.
their feelings, not to enrich
PEOPLE v. TABUGOCA
them
3.WON there was evident premeditation 285 SCRA 312 (1998)
 No, there wasn't. The trial court erred in appreciating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nature: Automatic review of a March 15, 1996 joint decision
evident premeditation. Only a few minutes passed
since the time they left the house to the time that the Ilagan, Isabela decision which found Tabugoca in two criminal
PEOPLE v. MEDINA cases guilty of Two (2) counts of rape committed against his
act was committed, thus there is no sufficient amount
286 SCRA 44 (1998) own daughters sentenced him to reclusion perpetue for the first
of time to contemplate and reflect upon the
consequences of the act, therefore no evident and death for the second.
Nature: Appeal from a decision of RTC Batangas City
premeditation.
convicting Alberto Medina of the crime of murder of Andres
Dalisay
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
9
Facts: Jacqueline and her 3 younger sisters Janet, Jinky and December 10, 1994. Jacqueline allegedly informed him on intimidation be sufficient to consummate the purpose
jewel lived under the sole care of their father after their mother the date of his arrest that he was drunk on March 28, 1992, the accused had in mind.
died August 28, 1991. Tabugoca surmised that he was based on Jacqueline's  In the case at bar, with the previous beatings Jinky had
supposed statement. Jacqueline testified that Tabugoca did gotten from Tabugoca, resistance could not have been
March 28, 1992, around 10pm, Jacqueline (12yrs 3mos at the smell of liquor and may have had had a few drinks then expected from her.
time, b. December 27, 1979)  Jinky: Tabugoca said that he had also been drinking then  Tabugoca's contention of consensual sex is ridiculous!
 Tabugoca woke up Jacqueline to scratch his back. and could not recall what had happened after he had No showing that Jinky is a sexual pervert or a woman
 Tabugoca removed her shorts and underwear and made finished drinking. Jinky testified that Tabugoca had been of loose morals.
her lie down beside him, then inserted his penis in her drunk on the night of December 9, 1994.  Consent obtained by fear of personal violence is not
vagina. consent!
 Tabugoca told her not to tell anyone if she did not want to Tabugoca claimed that he started drinking after his wife died,  Therefore, Tabugoca is guilty of two (2) counts of rape.
be harmed. resorting to drink when he remembered his wife and that before
her death, he did not drink. He also claims that his children filed 2.WON the RTC had jurisdiction
December 9, 1994, early morning - JINKY (12yrs 9mos at the the complaints in revenge for his "castigating or whipping" them
time, b. March 5, 1982) whenever they committed mistakes.  Yes. Tabugoca's position that the the RTC's jurisdiction
 Jinky was cleaning some articles in their house when to punish him is limited only to the Jinky's criminal
Tabugoca aproached her and took off his clothes. Issues, Held, Ratio complaint of frustrated rape and cannot cover
 Tabugoca ordered her to lie down and removed her shorts 1.WON Tabugoca is guilty of rape consummated rape is a meritless argument.
and underwear then inserted his penis into her vagina.  When it is said that the filing of the complaint by the
 Jinky cried out and complained to Tabugoca that she was  Yes. offended party in cases of rape is jurisdictional, what is
in pain.  Tabugoca's guilt has been proven by the prosecution meant is that it is the complaint that starts the
 Tabugoca explained that it is ordinary to feel pain because beyond reasonable doubt. prosecutory proceeding, but it is not the complaint
it was her first time to do it.  Tabugoca neither denied the charges against him nor which confers jurisdiction on the court to try the case.
 After a while, he did not continue, and told Jinky that they raised any absolutory cause in his defense.  The court's jurisdiction is vested in it by the Judiciary
would continue the following day.  The categorical and untraversed testimonies of Law. (People v. Leoparte)
Jacqueline and Jinky as to how Tabugoca committed  Since the penalty for rape in the complaint filed by
December 10, 1994, dawn - JINKY the bestial outrage, and their identification of the Jacqueline is properly within the jurisdiction of the
 Tabugoca made another attempt to molest Jinky. accused as their defiler remain uncontroverted and RTC, the lower court involved in this case may hear
 Jinky resisted, causing Tabugoca to just lie down and leave fully establish the charges. Jacqueline's failure to and try the offense charged in the information and may
her alone. immediately report the crime does not necessarily cast impose the punishment for it.
doubt on the credibility of her charge. We cannot  The right and power of a court to try the accused for
December 10, 1994, later on expect young Jacqueline to disregard the threat on her the crime of rape attaches upon the fifing of the
life and immediately cry rape in the face of her father's complaint, and a charge in the allegations thereof as to
 Jacqueline and Jinky were watching TV in their
threats and his constant presence in her home. the manner of committing the crime should not operate
grandmother's (Perlita Alejandro).
 It is highly inconceivable that Jacqueline would invent to divest the court of jurisdiction already acquired.
 Jinky told their lola about the sexual abuses of their father.
a charge that would only bring shame and humiliation (People v. Bangalao, et.al.)
This prompted Jacqueline to reveal her similar experience
upon them and their family and be the object of gossip  Therefore, the RTC had jurisdiction.
two years past.
among their classmates and friends in order to get
even with their father or to empathize with her sister, 3.WON the death penalty should be imposed
December 12, 1994
especially given our culture.
 Their grandmother brought them to the Municipal Health
 It is axiomatic in criminal law that in order to sustain a  Yes
Officer of Naguilian for physical examination.
conviction for rape, full penetration is not required.  The only possible basis of the penalty under the rules
 Dr. Maryann M. Fontanares' findings suggested that in
 2 forms of intimidation under Art. 335 RPC of graduating penalties under the RPC is the presence
Jacqueline's case, she was forcibly abused and the
(Matrimonio): (1) threats, (2) overpowering moral of a privileged mitigating circumstance. There was
incident, the first one happened long ago, based on the
influence. none shown to exist.
healed scars of the hymen, and in Jinky's case that full
penetration was unsuccessful although attempts were  Tabugoca exercised overpowering moral influence  Therefore, the death penalty should be imposed.
done based on the swollen vulva of the victim. over the victims, being their father. This is sufficient to
intimidate and force them to submit to his desires 4.WON drunkenness in this case is a valid defense
Tabugoca tried to claim exemption from criminal liability on the  For rape to exist, it is not necessary that the
ground of insanity brought about by intoxication intimidation employed be so great or of such character
 Jacqueline: Tabugoca allegedly only came to know of what as could not be resisted. What is necessary is that the 
No. Tabugoca's feeble excuse of having been under
the influence of liquor in order to disclaim knowledge of
happened to Jacqueline when the police arrested him on his actions is unbelievable.
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
10
  He did not comply with the evidentiary requirements perpetua (Jacqueline)  Dr. Araceli Maravilla of Dr. Jose Reyes Memorial hospital
whereby he could claim intoxication as a mitigating Death (Jinky) sadi Puno was an outpatient who could very well live with
circumstance. Damages None Jacqueline 25,000 (moral society even if he was afflicted with schizophrenic reaction.
 The attendance of intoxication is affirmed as an damages) 25,000  Dr. Reynaldo Robles stated that Puno had schizophrenic
aggravating circumstance on the additional finding that (exemplary damages) reaction but that this condition was "not socially
it was habitual. Jinky 25,000 (exemplary incapacitating"
 Therefore, drunkenness was not a valid defense. It damages)  Cr. Carlso Vicente of the national Mental Hospital testified
was an aggravating circumstance! that Puno acted with discernment and could distinguish
right from wrong.
5.WON Tabugoca was sane when he committed the crime -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  21 October 1970 - Puno was indicted for the murder in the
Circuit Criminal Court at Pasig, Rizal. Alleged in the
information as aggravating circumstances were evident
 Yes. Tabugoca failed to overthrow the presumption of PEOPLE v. PUNO
premeditation, abuse of superiority and disregard for sex.
sanity. The law presumes every man to be sane. The 105 SCRA 151 (1981)
Puno was sentenced to death and ordered to pay 22kPhp
person accused of a crime who pleads the exempting
Nature: Automatic review from the decision of circuit criminal to the heirs of the victim
circumstance of insanity has necessarily the
consequent burden of proving it. (People v. Catanyag) court of Pasig, Rizal.
The issue is whether or not Puno was insane when he killed
 In order for insanity to be taken as an exempting Aling Kikay.
circumstance, there must be complete depreciation of Facts:
intelligence in the commission of the act or that the  8 September 1970 - around 2pm Ernesto Puno entered the
bedroom of 72 year old Francisca Col also known as Aling Record from Puno's stay at the National mental hospital stated
accused acted without the least discernment. Mere that he had been an out patient for schizophrenia in 1962,
abnormality of his mental faculties does not preclude Kikay, in Little Bagio, barrio Tinajeros, Malabon, Rizal.
Aling Kikay was on the bed, when Puno entered and recovered, had a relapse in 1964, improved and in 1966 his
imputability. (People v. So) sickness remained UNIMPROVED. Treatment continued in San
 The defense did not present any expert witness, insulted her by saying "Mangkukulam ka, mambabarang,
mayroon kang bubuyog." Then, he repeatedly slapped her Lazaro Compound up to 1970 where he was relieved of
psychiatric evaluation report, psychological findings or symptoms and did not come back for medication. It cited that he
evidence regarding Tabugoca's mental condition at the and struck her on the head several times with a hammer
until she was dead. The assault was witnessed by Hilaria was quiet and as usual manageable. The report stated that he
time of commission of the offenses. "is presently free from any social incapacitating psychotic
 His charade of amnesia is a desperate ploy for dela Cruz who was persent in the room during the attack,
and by Lina Pajes, a tenant in the next room. After killing symptoms", but persons suffering from schizophrenia may retain
exculpation. some of the residual symptoms but ti wouldn't affect their
 In any case, amnesia is not, in and of itself, a defense the old lady Puno went into the next room, where the girls
had taken refuge and made the following confession and discernment of right and wrong.
to a criminal charge unless it is shown by competent
proof that the accused did not know of the nature and threat "Huag kayong magkakamaling tumawag ng pulis at
sabihin nunyo na umalis kayo ng bahay at hindi ninyo alam The court says: "in the light of the strict rule just stated and the
quality of his action and that it was wrong. circumstance surrounding the killing, we are led to the
kung sino ang pumatay sa maanda." Or accd. To iina
 Failure to remember is in itself no proof of the mental conclusion that Puno was not legally insane when he killed, the
"pinatay ko na ang iyong matanda. Huag kayong tumawag
condition of the accused when the crime was victim'' The court cited that had he been a homicidal maniac he
ng pulis. Pag tumawag layo ng pulis, kayo ang • •
committed. (Thomas v. State) would have killed Lina and Hilaria too. The evidence should
pahihigantihan ko." After Puno left, Iina called the pol'ice.
 Therefore, Tabugoca was sane at the time of Puno fled to his parents' house then later on to his second prove clearly that he was insane at the time of the commission
commission of the crimes. cousin, Teotimo Puno's house. of the crime.
 10 September 1970 - Puno's father surrendered him to the
Judgment: Affirmed with modification. Insanity exists when there is a complete deprivation of
police. He was brought to the national mental hospital in
intelligence in committing the act, that is, the accused is
Mandaluyong, Rizal. He was charged with murder in the
In accordance with Art. 83 of the RPC as amended by Sec. 25 deprived of reason, he acts without the least discernment
municipal court.
of RA 7659 (reimposing the death penalty), upon finality of this because there is a complete absence of the power to discern, or
decision, the records will be forwarded immediately to the Office  Puno's wife, his sister in law and his 2nd cousin all testified total deprivation of freedom of wilt. Mere abnormality of the
of the President for the possible exercise of the pardoning in court describing his appearance [bloodshot eyes] and mental faculties will not exclude imputability.
power. his behavior immediately before and after them murder,
{boxing the dog, having and imaginary bumble bee flying Two aggravating circumstances, dwelling and disregard of the
around him, singing, etc..] respect due to the age of the victim are off set by the mitigating
RTC SUPREME COURT
 The defense presented 3 doctors to prove insanity but the circumstances of voluntary surrender and the offender's mental
doctors instead proved that Puno had acted with illness (mild schizophrenic reaction) which diminished him of his
Crime two (2) counts of rape same
discernment when he killed Aling Kikay. will power but did not deprive him of consciousness of his acts.
committed against
his own daughters
Sentence Reclusion same Medium penalty for murder imposed, Death penalty is set aside.
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
11
  26 March 1935 - Dr. Toribio appeared before the court for evidence must be clear and convincing. The courts need to
Accused is sentenced to RECLUSION PERPETUA the inquiry. The court issued another order asking to distinguish insanity in law from passion or eccentricity,
summon other doctors from the hospital and to put Bonoan mental weakness or mere depression resulting from
Makasiar, dissenting: The appellant should not be held liable for under another doctor, Dr. Jose Fernandez, for closer physical ailment. In the separate reports given by Dr.
the crime of murder. He was mentally ill when he committed the observation. Dr. Fernandez filed his report on Toribio Joson and Dr. Fernandez they both diagnosed
alleged killing of Francisca Col (Aling Kikay). His medical  11 June 1935. Bonoan to be unstable, stating that "he will always have
records properly evaluated and confirmed undeniably establish  28 June 1935 the case was called again, Dr Fernandez troubles and difficulties with this world of realities." Bonoan
the fact that he had been ailing with a psychotic disorder showed up in court and reported that Bonoan was still not was diagnosed with dementia praecox which is a mental
medically known as chronic schizophrenia of the paranoid type. in a condition to defend himself. disease that disqualifies a person from legal responsibility
Hi record for treatment stated him to be "unimproved" upon  21 January 1936 - Dr. Fernandez reported to the court that for his actions. In these people homicidal attacks are
discharge and his out patient record merely stated him as Bonoan could be discharged from the hospital and appear common because of the delusions that they are being
"improved" not "recovered" or "unimproved". Appellant was for trial as he was "considered a recovered case." • 27 interfered with or that their property is being taken. The
treated 18 times in the National mental Hospital and Jose Reyes February 1936 - Bonoan was arraigned and pleaded "not court w as of the opinion that Bonoan was demented at the
Memorial Hospital in a span of 8 years, characteristic of the guilty" and the trial was held. To prove motive and rnenta! time he perpetrated the serious offense charge with and
chronic nature of his mental illness. This was confirmed by Dr. normalcy of Bonoan the prosecution called on Damaso that consequently he is exempt from criminal liability.
Carlos Vicente. A person with Chronic Schizophrenia does not Arnoco who testified that the reason for Bonoan's attack
was that Guison owed him 55php and would not pay him Judgment of the lower court REVERSED.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- back. Bonoan had bought the knife with which he stabbed
Guison for 50 centavos and had been waiting 2 days to kill Defendant appellant AQCUITTED but to be kept in confinement
PEOPLE v. BONOAN him. He acquired this informa tion when he arrested and in the San Lazaro Hospital or any other hospital for the insane.
64 Phil. 87 (1937) questioned Bonoan. Bonoan was charged with the murder
of Carlos Guison, and sentenced him to life imprisonment IMPERIAL, dissenting
Nature: Appeal from a judgment of the court of first instance of and to pay 1000 Php to indemnify the heirs of Guison. "The dissenting opinions, in establishing the conclusion that the
Manila  The defendant appealed the case and his counsel cited accused was then in the possession of his mental faculties or, at
that the lower court had erred in finding that Bonoan had least, at a lucid interval, are based on the fact admitted by the
Facts: dementia intermittently and not immediately prior to the parties and supported by expert testimony, that the accused
 12 December 1934 - Celestino Bonoan met Carlos Guison commission of the offense, in finding that the accused did before the commission of a crime, had been cured of dementia
on Avenida Rizal near a barbershop close to Tom's Dixie not show any abnormality either in behavior, action, praecox and later of manic depressive psychosis." The
Kitchen. Francisco Beech, who was at the time in the language, appearance, or action that he was mentally inference of the majority that the accused was insane is not
barbershop, heard Bonoan say in Tagalog, "I will kill you." deranged, in finding that the burden of proof lay in the sufficiently supported by evidence. No attention was given to the
Beech turned around and saw Bonoan withdrawing his defendant to prove that he was mentally deranged at the decision of the judge who originally tried the case, which should
right hand, which held a knife, from the side of Guison who time of the crime, and in not acquitting Bonoan. have been done because he was able to observe Bonoan, the
said, "I will pay you," but Bonoan simply replied saying that witnesses, the evidence and the testimonies. This court
he would kill him and then stabbed Guison 3 times on the Issue: WON Bonoan was insane at the time of the generally gives importance to the conclusions drawn by the
left side. The incident was witnessed by policeman commission of the crime. judge who tried the case in first instance unless there is a clear
Damaso Arnoco. Bonoan was arrested on the day itself. contradiction in the evidence and the decision, which is not the
Bonoan admitted to stabbing Guison. Guison was taken to case here.
 There are 3 different theories used
PGH where he died 2 days later. (1) Insanity as a defense in a confession and avoidance
 5 January 1935 - Prosecuting attorney of Manila filed an DIAZ. dissenting
and as such must be proved beyond reasonable
information charging Celestino Bonoan with the crime of The appellant committed the crime when he was sane or at
doubt. Proof of insanity at the time of committing the
murder. least during a lucid interval. He had motive to kill Guison
criminal act should be clear and satisfactory in order
 16 January 1935 - Bonoan's defense counsel objected to [55php], as clearly stated by the arresting police officer. The law
to acquit the accused on the ground of insanity.
the arraignment on the ground that the defendant was presumes that everyone is sane, and insanity is an exception, to
(Philippines uses this)
mentally deranged and was at the time confined in the be established by clear proof and it is not usually permanent.
(2) That an affirmative verdict of insanity is to be
psychopathic Hospital. The court issued and order There is no evidence or record that can prove that Bonoan was
governed by preponderance of evidence, and in this
requiring the Direct of the Hospital to report on Bonoan's insane at the time he committed the crime, or that he was
view, insanity is not to be established beyond a
mental condition. A report was rendered by Dr. Toribio continuing to suffer from insanity from the date of the
reasonable doubt.
Joson. commission of the crime. Where it is shown that the defendant
(3) Prosecution must prove sanity beyond a reasonable
 23 March 1935 - the case was called for arraignment experiences lucid intervals, the crime is assumed to have been
doubt.
again, the defense objected and again the court filed committed during one of them, unless proven otherwise.
another order requiring the doctor who examined Bonoan  When a defendant in a criminal case interposes the
to appear in court to report on Bonoan's mental condition. CONCEPCION, dissenting
defense of mental incapacity, the burden of establishing
the fact rests upon the defendant. To prove insanity the
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
12
There is no evidence or record to prove that Bonoan was insane longer there. Worried, she looked for him. On her way committed it when he shouted (during laboratory examination)
at the time he committed the crime, and there were no records home, she heard people saying that a stabbing occurred. that he killed Mrs. Sigua. This statement makes it highly
to show that he had suffered a relapse of the condition he had She saw her husband in her parents-in-law's house with doubtful that the accused was insane when he committed the
sought treatment for at the San Lazaro hospital years before the people milling around. She asked her husband why he did act.
crime was committed. Bonoan had been sane for 9 years [or at the act, to which Rosalino answered, "That's the only cure
least "socially adjustable"]. The attack of insomnia before the for my ailment. I have cancer of the heart. If I don't kill the The fact that the accused was carrying an envelope where he
event is not clear proof that he was insane or suffering a bout deceased in a number of days, I would die.” That same hid the fatal weapon, that he ran away from the scene of the
with insanity at the time of the crime, it merely presents a day, the accused went to Manila. incident after he stabbed the victim several times, that he fled to
possibility, and the innocence to the accused cannot be based Manila to evade arrest, indicate that he was conscious and
on a mere possibility. The accused when questioned by the Dr. Santiago and Dr. Echavez of the National Center for Mental knew the consequences of his acts in stabbing the victim. (This
police immediately after the crime did not exhibit insane Health testified that the accused was confined in the mental was taken from the trial court's decision).
behavior. It cannot be said that Bonoan stabbed Guison hospital, as per order of the trial court dated Aug. 17, 1987.
because of a hallucination because Guison actually owed him Based on the reports of their staff, they concluded that Rosalino Judgment: questioned decision AFFIRMED.
money and this was confirmed by the fact of his say ing "I am was psychotic or insane long before, during and after the
going to pay you" before he was stabbed. This shows the commission of the alleged crime and classified his insanity as -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
motive for aggression [vengeance] an organic mental disorder secondary to cerebro-vascular
accident or stroke. But Dr. Balatbat who treated the accused for PEOPLE v. TANEO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ailments secondary to stroke, and Dr. Lim who testified that the 58 Phil. 255 (1933)
accused suffered dorm occlusive disease, concluded that
PEOPLE v. DUNGO Rosalino was somehow rehabilitated after a series of medical Facts: Potenciano Taneo and his wife lived in his parent's
199 SCRA 860 (1991) treatment in their clinic. house in Dolores, Ormoc. On January 16, 1932, a fiesta was
being celebrated in the said barrio and guests were entertained
Nature: Automatic review of the decision of the RTC of Issue: WON the accused was insane during the commission of in the house, among them were Fred Tanner and Luis Malinao.
Pampanga convicting the accused of murder. the crime charged. Early that afternoon, Potenciano went to sleep and while
sleeping, he suddenly got up, left the room bolo in hand and,
Facts: On March 16, 1987 between 2:00 and 3:00pm, the Held: No. For insanity to relieve the person of criminal liability, it upon meeting his wife who tried to stop him, wounded her in the
accused went to Mrs. Sigua's office at the Department of is necessary that there be a complete deprivation of intelligence abdomen. He also attacked Fred and Luis and tried to attack his
Agrarian Reform, Apalit, Pampanga. After a brief talk, the in committing the act, that he acts without the least discernment father, after which, he wounded himself. Potenciano's wife, who
accused drew a knife from the envelope he was carrying and and that there be complete absence or deprivation of the was 7 months pregnant at that time, died five days later as a
stabbed Mrs. Sigua several times. After which he departed from freedom of the will. result of the wound.
the office with blood stained clothes, carrying a bloodied bladed
weapon. The autopsy report revealed that the victim sustained Under Philippine jurisdiction, there's no definite test or criterion The TC found Potenciano guilty of parricide and was sentenced
14 wounds, 5 of which were fatal. for insanity. However, the definition of insanity under Sec 1039* to reclusion perpetua.
of the Revised Administrative Code can be applied. In essence,
Rodolfo Sigua, husband of the deceased, testified that it states that insanity is evinced by a deranged and perverted It appears from the evidence that the day before the
sometime in February 1987, the accused Rosalino Dungo condition of the mental faculties, which is manifested in commission of the crime, the defendant had a quarrel over a
inquired from him why his wife was requiring so many language or conduct. An insane person has no full and clear glass of "tuba" with Collantes and Abadilla, who invited him to
documents from him. Rodolfo explained to him the procedure at understanding of the nature and consequence of his act. come down and fight. When he was about to go down, he was
the DAR. stopped by his wife and his mother. On the day of the
Evidence of insanity must refer to the mental condition at the commission of the crime, it was noted that the defendant was
The accused, in defense of himself, tried to show that he was very time of doing the act. However, it is also permissible to sad and weak, had a severe stomachache that's why he went to
insane at the time of the commission of the offense: receive evidence of his mental condition for a reasonable period bed in the early afternoon. The defendant stated that when he
before and after the time of the act in question. The vagaries of fell asleep, he dreamed that Collantes was trying to stab him
 Two weeks prior to March 16, 1987, Rosalino's wife the mind can only be known by outward acts. with a bolo while Abadila held his feet. That's why he got up and
noticed that he appears to be in deep thought always, it seemed to him that his enemies were inviting him to come
maltreating their children when he was not used to it It is not usual for an insane person to confront a specified down; he armed himself with a bolo and left the room. At the
before. There were also times that her husband would person who may have wronged him. But in the case at hand, door, he met his wife who seemed to say to him that she was
inform her that his feet and head were on fire when in truth the accused was able to Mrs. Sigua. From this, it can be wounded. Then, he fancied seeing his wife really wounded and
they were not. inferred that the accused was aware of his acts. This also in desperation wounded himself. As his enemies seemed to
 On that fateful day, Rosalino complained of stomachache established that the accused has lucid intervals. multiply around him, he attacked everybody that came his way.
but they didn't bother to buy medicine as the pain went
away immediately. Thereafter, he went back to the store. Moreover, Dr. Echavez testified to the effect that the appellant Issue: WON defendant acted while in a dream.
But when Andrea followed him to the store, he was no could have been aware of the nature of his act at the time he
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
13
Yes. The defendant acted while in a dream and his acts, Nature: Appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance may be attributed either to his being feebleminded or eccentric,
therefore, were not voluntary in the sense of entailing criminal of Camarines Sur finding Abelardo Formigones guilty of or to a morbid mental condition produced by remorse at having
liability. parricide and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, to indemnify killed his wife. A man who could feel the pangs of jealousy and
the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P2000, and to pay take violent measures to the extent of killing his wife who he
The apparent lack of motive for committing a criminal act does costs. suspected of being unfaithful to him, in the belief that in doing
not necessarily mean that there are none, but that simply they so, he was vindicating his honor, could hardly be regarded as an
are not known to us. Although an extreme moral perversion may Facts: In the month of November 1946, Abelardo was living on imbecile. Whether or not the suspicions were justified, is of little
lead a man to commit a crime without a real motive but just for his farm in Camarines Sur with his wife, Julia Agricola and their or no importance. The fact is that he believed her faithless.
the sake of committing it. In the case at hand, the court found 5 children. From there they transferred in the house of his half- Furthermore, in his written statement, he readily admitted that
not only lack of motives for the defendant to voluntarily commit brother, Zacarias Formigones in the same municipality to find he killed his wife, and at the trial he made no effort to deny of
the acts complained of (read: he loved his wife dearly, he tried employment as harvesters of palay. After a month, Julia was repudiate said written statements, thus saving the government
to attack his father in whose house the lived and the guests sitting at the head of the stairs of the house when Abelardo, all the trouble and expense of catching him and securing his
whom he invited), but also motives for not committing the acts. without previous quarrel or provocation whatsoever, took his conviction.
bofo from the wall of the house and stabbed his wife Julia, in the
Dr. Serafica, an expert witness in the case, stated that back, the blade penetrating the right lung and causing a severe There are however 2 mitigating circumstances present:
considering the circumstances of the case, the defendant acted hemorrhage resulting in her death. Abelardo then took his dead 1) Passion or obfuscation (having killed his wife in a jealous
while in a dream, under the influence of a hallucination and not wife and laid her on the floor of the living room and then lay rage)
in his right mind. down beside her. In this position, he was found by the people 2) Feeblemindedness
who came in response to the shouts made by his eldest
The wife's wound may have been inflicted accidentally. The daughter, Irene Formigones. In conclusion, the appellant is found guilty of parricide and the
defendant did not dream that he was assaulting his wife, but judgment of the lower court is hereby affirmed with the
that he was defending himself from his enemies. The motive was admittedly that of jealousy because according modification that he appellant will be credited with one-half of
to his statement, he used to have quarrels with his wife for any preventive imprisonment he has undergone (because of the
Judgment: defendant not criminally liable for the offense. It was reason that he often saw her in the company of his brother, 2 mitigating circumstances)
also ordered that he be confined in the government insane Zacarias; that he suspected the two were maintaining illicit
asylum and will not be released until the director thereof finds relations because he noticed that his wife had become
that his liberty would no longer constitute a menace indifferent to him. During the preliminary investigation, the
accused pleaded guilty. At the case in the Courts of First
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Instance, he also pleaded guilty but did not testify. His counsel
presented the testimony of two guards of the provincial jail
PEOPLE v. DELIMA where Abelardo was confined to the effect that his conduct was
rather strange and that he behaved like an insane person, at
Facts: Lorenzo Napoleon escaped from jail. Poiiceman Felipe times he would remain silent, walk around stark naked, refuse to
Delima found him in the house of Jorge Alegria, armed with a take a bath and was his clothes etc... The appeal is based
pointed piece of bamboo in the shape of a lance. Delima merely on the theory that the appellant is an IMBECILE and
ordered his surrender but Napoleon answered with a stroke of therefore exempt from criminal liability under article 12 of the
his lance. The policeman dodged it, fired his revolver but didn't RPC.
hit Napoleon. The criminal tried to ran away, not throwing his
weapon; the policeman shot him dead. Issue: WON Abelardo is an imbecile at the time of the
commission of the crime and therefore exempted from criminal
Delima was tried and convicted for homicide; he appealed. liability

Held: The SC ruled that Delima must be acquitted. The court No. He is not an imbecile. According Dr. Francisco Gomes, he
held that the killing was done in performance of a duty. was suffering only from feeblemindedness and not imbecility
Napoleon was under the obligation to surrender and his and that he could distinguish between right and wrong. In order
disobedience with a weapon compelled Delima to kill him. The that a person could be regarded as an imbecile within the
action was justified by the circumstances. meaning of article 12 of the RPC so as to be exempt from
criminal liability, he must be deprived completely of reason or
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- discernment and freedom of will at the time of committing the
crime.
PEOPLE v. FORMIGONES
87 Phil. 658 (1950) As to the strange behavior of the accused during his
confinement, assuming it was not feigned to stimulate insanity, it
TRINA JOY A. SOLIDON I-A
/var/www/apps/collegelist/repos/collegelist/trunk/collegelist/tmp/scratch6/4689870.doc
14