People vs Guardiano Marquez

Chester Cabalza recommends his visitors to please read the original & full text of the case cited. Xie xie!

People vs Guardiano Marquez
G.R. No. 31268
July 31, 1929

Facts:

The defendant admits that he killed his wife, Oliva Sumampong; but he alleges that he caught her in the act of adultery, and so took her life.

Once the appellant had admitted that it was he who killed his wife, it was incumbent upon him to completely prove his defense, which is, that he found her in the act of adultery. The testimony he gave during the hearing of this case in the trial court, noticeably weakened by his statements before the justice of the peace, cannot be considered sufficient proof of the justification he alleges, and so the fact remains that he took his wife's life without having proven sufficient justification.

Issue:

W/O the defendant is liable for the crime under Articles 246 or 247 of the RPC?

Held:

Nevertheless, it was established at the trial that on the occasion of the crime, the defendant saw an unknown person jump out of the window of his house and that the appellant's wife begged for his pardon on her knees. The first of these facts, under the circumstances, warrants the conclusion that the defendant believed his wife to be unfaithful, and was overcome by passion and obfuscation. The second fact leads us to believe that the wife could not have been wholly unaware of the unknown person's presence in her house that night, inasmuch as she considered herself guilty and begged her husband's pardon, which is an undisputed fact in these proceedings. To our mind, such conduct on the part of his wife, thus inferred from the proceedings, constitutes a sufficient provocation, which must be considered as a mitigating circumstance in the face of the defendant.

But we consider the two mitigating circumstances of immediate provocation, and passion and obfuscation (article 9, paragraphs 4 and 7, Penal Code) to have been established. And by virtue of these two circumstances, following rule 5 of article 81 of the Penal Code, as amended by Act No. 2298, and there was no aggravating circumstance, the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law shall be imposed.
The defendant is sentenced to the personal penalty of twelve years and one day cadena temporal instead of life imprisonment as held by the court below, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed in all other respects, with the costs of both instances against the appellant. So ordered.