11/20/2016

PeoplevsDiaz:130654:July28,1999:J.Romero:EnBanc

SYLLABI/SYNOPSIS

ENBANC

[G.R.No.130654.July28,1999]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs. EDUARDO BASIN JAVIER,

accusedappellant.
DECISION
ROMERO,J.:

BeforeusonautomaticreviewistheDecision[1]datedApril15,1997oftheRegionalTrialCourtofAgoo,
LaUnion,Branch32,[2]inCriminalCaseNo.A3155,convictingaccusedappellantEduardoJavierofthecrime
of parricide and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of death and to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the
amountofP50,000.00asmoraldamagesandP21,730.00asactualexpenses.
The Information filed before the trial court which charged accusedappellant with the crime of parricide
readsasfollows:
"Thatonoraboutthe15thdayofJune1996,intheMunicipalityofSantoTomas,ProvinceofLaUnion,
Philippines,andwithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccusedwiththeintenttoand
beingthenarmedwithabolo,didthenandtherewilfully,unlawfullyandfeloniouslyattack,assaultanduseof
personalviolence,byhackingwiththesaidweapononeFLORENTINAJAVIERYLACESTE,hislegitimate
spouse,andasaresultofwhichhissaidwifesufferedfatalinjurieswhichdirectlycausedherdeathimmediately
thereafter,tothedamageandprejudiceoftheheirsofthevictim.
Contrarytolaw."[3]
Uponarraignment,theaccusedappellantpleadednotguiltyandtrialensued.
The prosecution evidence, consisting of the testimonies of Consolacion Javier Panit and Alma Javier,
daughtersofthevictimandaccusedappellant,andSPO1RotelioPachoaredetailedasfollows:
Accusedappellant Eduardo Javier and the victim Florentina Laceste Javier were legally married on
December 18, 1954.[4] In their fortyone years of marriage, they begotten children. Accusedappellant and
FlorentinalivedatTubod,Sto.Tomas,LaUnionwithoneoftheirdaughters,AlmaJavier.[5]
OnJune15,1996betweentwoo'clockandthreeoclockinthemorning,ConsolacionJavierPanit,wholives
nearherparent'shouseabouttentofifteenmetersaway,heardhermother,Florentinashouting"Arayatandacta
papatayen nac ni Tatangyo" (Your father is going to kill me). After she heard her mother scream for help,
Consolacion rushed out of her house and met her sister, Alma who, weeping, told her that their parents were
quarrelling. Alma, at the time of the incident was living in her parents' house. Consolacion and Alma then
proceeded to their brother Manuel's house, which is located about seventy to eighty meters away from their
parents'house.The three then proceeded to their parents' house.Manuel, who entered first, found the lifeless
body of his mother and his father, accusedappellant, wounded in the abdomen. Manuel then ordered
Consolaciontogetatricycletobringtheirfathertothehospital.Atthispoint,Manuelinformedhersistersthat
their mother was dead and that their father confessed to him that he killed his wife and thereafter allegedly
stabbedhimself.Florentinawasfounddeadintheirbedroom,drenchedinherownblood.[6]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/jul99/130654.htm

1/4

11/20/2016

PeoplevsDiaz:130654:July28,1999:J.Romero:EnBanc

AccusedappellantwasbroughttothehospitalbyConsolacion'shusband,Fernando,andherson,Jefferson,
whileManuelwentouttogethelp.[7]
SPO1RotelioPacho,assignedasdeskinvestigatorattheSto.TomasPoliceStationinLaUnion,testifiedin
the investigation he conducted with SPO4 Manuel Zarate and SPO1 Agaton Laroza regarding the incident of
June15,1996.HestatedthathereceivedacallforassistancefromthebarangaycaptainofTugod,Sto.Tomas
becauseaccusedappellantallegedlykilledhiswife.Thepoliceauthoritiesthenproceededtoaccusedappellant's
houseinBrgy.Tugod,Sto.Tomas,wheretheysawFlorentinalyinginthebedroomfloorcoveredwithblood.
Uponinterviewingthevictim'schildren,PachotestifiedthatManueltoldhimthathisfatherconfessedtokilling
hiswife.Manuelthensurrendered to him the bolo covered with blood which was foundinthebedroom. The
bolowasallegedlyusedbyaccusedappellantinassaultinghiswife.[8]Themedicalfindingsindicatedthatthe
victimsufferedfrommultipleinjuriesandherneckwasalmostcutofffromherbody.[9]
AccusedappellantEduardoJavier,inhistestimony,admittedkillinghiswifeintheirbedroomwiththeuse
ofasharpbolo.HeidentifiedtheboloasthesameonepresentedbytheprosecutionasExhibit"A"andwhichhe
usedinwoundinghimself.Accusedappellanttoldthecourtthathekilledhiswifebecausehecouldnotsleepfor
almostamonth.Heclaimedthatwhenthekillingtookplace,hismindwenttotallyblankandhedidnotknow
whathewasdoing.[10]Heclaimsthathewasinsaneatthetimeoftheincident.
Thetrialcourtrejectedaccusedappellant'sdefenseofinsanityandonApril15,1997renderedadecision
findinghimguiltyofparricideandsentencedhimtosufferthepenaltyofdeath.Thedispositiveportionofthe
decisionreadsasfollows:
"WHEREFORE,inviewofalltheforegoingconsideration,theaccused,EduardoJavieryBasinishereby
sentencedtosufferthepenaltyofdeathtopaytheheirsofthevictimstheamountofP50,000.00asmoral
damagesforthedeathofthevictimandP21,730.00asactualexpensesandtopaythecostoftheproceedings.
SOORDERED."[11]
Inthisappeal,accusedappellantallegedthatthetrialcourterredinimposingthedeathpenalty,considering
thepresenceoftwomitigatingcircumstancesofillnessoftheoffenderandpassionandobfuscation.[12]While
accusedappellantdoesnotquestionthedecisionofthetrialcourtinrejectinghisdefenseofinsanity,heargues
thatheshouldbemetedalowerpenaltybecauseatthetimeoftheincident,hewassufferingfromlossofsleep
foraprolongedperiodoftime,whichwouldhavecausedhimtocommitthecrime.
He further contends that his suspicion that his wife was having an illicit relationship with another man,
aggravatedbyhisillness,goadedhimtocommitthecrime.
The Office of the Solicitor General, on the other hand, argues that accusedappellant cannot claim the
mitigatingcircumstanceofillnessintheabsenceofamedicalfindingtosupporthisclaim. Accusedappellant
cannotlikewisebeentitledtothemitigatingcircumstanceofpassionandobfuscationintheabsenceofsufficient
evidence.
Wefindtheappealbereftofmerit.
Accusedappellant, during trial, admitted killing his wife, but interposed as defense the exempting
circumstanceofinsanity.However,thetrialcourtrejectedthisdefenseofinsanityforfailureofthedefenseto
prove that accusedappellant was indeed insane at the time of the incident. The defense never presented any
medicalrecordoftheaccusedappellant,norwasapsychiatristeverpresentedtovalidatethedefenseofinsanity.
Equallyimportant,thedefense,duringtrial,neverallegedtheaboveclaimedmitigatingcircumstancesofillness
andpassionandobfuscation,thusweakeningthecaseofaccusedappellant.
Inthisappeal,accusedappellantallegedthatpriortotheincident,hehadbeensufferingfrominsomniafor
aroundamonth,thusleadinghimtocommitanactbeyondhiscontrol,thekillingofhiswife,Florentina.The
defensewentontocitemedicalliteratureontheeffectsoftotalandpartialsleeplosstosupporthiscontentions.
[13]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/jul99/130654.htm

2/4

11/20/2016

PeoplevsDiaz:130654:July28,1999:J.Romero:EnBanc

Forthemitigatingcircumstanceofillnessoftheoffendertobeappreciated,thelawrequiresthepresenceof
thefollowingrequisites:(1)illnessmustdiminishtheexerciseofthewillpoweroftheoffenderand(2)such
illnessshouldnotdeprivetheoffenderofconsciousnessofhisacts.[14]
Sinceaccusedappellanthasalreadyadmittedtothekilling,itisincumbentuponhimtoprovetheclaimed
mitigatingcircumstanceofillness.Inthiscase,however,asidefromthetestimonyoftheaccusedthathismind
wentblankwhenhekilledhiswifeduetolossofsleep,nomedicalfindingwaspresentedregardinghismental
conditionatthetimeofkilling.ThisCourtcanhardlyrelyonthebareallegationsofaccusedappellant,noron
merepresumptionsandconjectures.No clear and convincing evidence was shown that accusedappellant was
sufferinganillnesswhichdiminishedhisexerciseofwillpoweratthetimeofthekilling.
On the other hand, it is clear that accusedappellant was aware of the acts he committed. First, he
remembered killing his wife in their bedroom with the use of a bolo, where he mangled her neck twice he
rememberedtryingtocommitsuicide,bywoundinghimselfwiththesameboloheusedinkillinghiswifeand
he remembered being brought to the hospital. Since he remembered the vital circumstances surrounding the
ghastlyincident,fromthetimeofthekillinguptothetimehewasbroughttothehospital,itshowsthathewas
in full control of his mental faculties. This negates his claim that he was suffering from an illness that
diminishedtheexercise of his willpower.On the basis of the foregoing, we cannot appreciate the mitigating
circumstanceallegedbyaccusedappellant.
Neithercanweappreciatethecircumstanceofpassionandobfuscationtomitigatehiscriminalliability.
In order to be entitled to the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, the following elements
shouldconcur:(1)thereshouldbeanactbothunlawfulandsufficienttoproducesuchconditionofmindand
(2) said act which produced the obfuscation was not far removed from the commission of the crime by a
considerablelengthoftime,duringwhichtheperpetratormightrecoverhismoralequanimity.[15]Theforegoing
elements were not proved to be present in instant case.In fact, during accusedappellant's testimony, he even
statedthathewasnotjealousofhiswife.
AscorrectlyobservedbytheOfficeoftheSolicitorGeneral:
"Inthecaseofappellant,thereislackofproofofthecausewhichproducedtheallegedpassionandobfuscation.
Appellant,inhistestimony,didnotaccounthowhekilledhiswifenordidheexplainthecausewhyhewas
promptedtokillhiswife.Verily,thereexistsnojustifiablebasisforapplyingtohimthismitigatingcircumstance
ofpassionandobfuscationasthecausewhichproducedithasnotbeenestablished."[16]
Alltold,theallegationspropoundedbyaccusedappellantthathissuspicionsregardinghiswife,aggravated
by his illness made it possible for him to kill his own wife, is but a mere afterthought to whittle down his
criminalliability.
Additionally,itisasettledrulethatfactualfindingsofthetrialcourtswillgenerallynotbedisturbedbythe
appellate court because it is in the best position to properly evaluate testimonial evidence considering that it
observesthedemeanor,conductandattitudeofwitnessesduringthetrial.Inthecaseatbar,thetrialcourtwas
abletoobservethebehaviourofaccusedappellantanditstatedthathisrecollectionofthedetailssurrounding
thekillingissoimpeccablethatonlyapersoninhisrightmindcanmakeit.
Thus,thetrialcourtwascorrectinconvictingaccusedappellantofthecrimeofparricideunderArticle246
oftheRevisedPenalCode(asamendedbyRepublicActNo.7659,Section5)whichprovidesthat:
"Anypersonwhoshallkillhisfather,motherorchild,whetherlegitimateorillegitimate,oranyofhis
ascendants,ordescendants,orhisspouse,shallbeguiltyofparricideandshallbepunishedbythepenaltyof
reclusionperpetuatodeath."
Thecrimeofparricide,notbeingacapitalcrimeperseasitisnotpunishablebymandatorydeathpenalty
butbytheflexiblepenaltyofreclusionperpetuatodeath,twoindivisiblepenalties,theapplicationofthelesser
orthegreaterpenaltydependsonthepresenceofmitigatingandaggravatingcircumstances.[17]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/jul99/130654.htm

3/4

11/20/2016

PeoplevsDiaz:130654:July28,1999:J.Romero:EnBanc

In this case, the information for parricide against accusedappellant did not allege any aggravating
circumstance.Nordidtheevidenceshowthattheprosecutionwasabletoproveanyaggravatingcircumstance.
[18]Likewise,nomitigatingcircumstanceisappreciatedbythisCourtinfavoroftheaccusedappellant.Thus,in
the absence of any aggravating or mitigating circumstance for the accusedappellant, the lesser penalty of
reclusionperpetuashouldbeimposed.
Asregardsthemonetaryliability,theCourttakestheamountofP50,000.00imposedbythetrialcourtas
oneofcivilindemnityinsteadofasmoraldamages.
WHEREFORE,thedecisionoftheRegionalTrialCourtofAgoo,LaUnion,Branch32,inCriminalCase
No. A3155 is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accusedappellant Eduardo Javier y Basin
shouldsufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetua.
SOORDERED.
Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Purisima, Pardo, Buena,
GonzagaReyes,andYnaresSantiago,JJ.,concur.
Davide,Jr.,C.J.,onleave.
[1]Rollo,pp.1531.
[2]JudgeLeoM.Rapatalo,presiding.
[3]Rollo,p.6.
[4]Records,p.3.
[5]TSN,February12,1997,pp.56.
[6]Ibid,pp.69.
[7]Id,p.9.
[8]TSN,February19,1997,pp.27.
[9]Records,p.5.
[10]TSN,March11,1997,pp.35.
[11]Rollo,pp.1531.
[12]Ibid,p.56.
[13]Id,pp.6465(Appellant'sBrief).
[14]Paragraph9,Article12oftheRevisedPenalCode.
[15]PeopleofthePhilippinesv.RubenTakbobo,224SCRA134(1993).
[16]Rollo,p.105.
[17]PeopleofthePhilippinesv.BenjaminReyes,292SCRA663,(July20,1998).
[18]Ibid.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/jul99/130654.htm

4/4