Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1989 > March 1989 Decisions > G.R. No. 61704 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NUEPE M. WAGAS:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 61704. March 8, 1989.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NUEPE WAGAS y MILAN, Accused-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Manuel M. Paredes for Accused-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL LAW; DEFENSE OF CAUSING DEATH UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES; ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS THEREOF. — The essential elements for such a defense: (1) that a legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person; and (2) that he kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. The death caused must be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the act of infidelity. People v. Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, September 14, 1987, 153 SCRA 742.

2. ID.; ID.; ALLEGED ACT OF INFIDELITY SUCCESSFULLY REBUTTLED; DEFENSE WITHOUT LEG TO STAND ON. — There was failure of the defense to prove the alleged discovery of the sexual congress between Victoria and Jacinto Solano. On the contrary, witnesses for the prosecution testified that Victoria had been with them picking berries all morning of that fateful day. Nothing in the record of this case do we find any basis for doubting this testimonial evidence and not appreciating it as sufficient proof of the fact of Victoria’s absence from their house all morning of April 30, 1981. The improbability of the claimed adulterous rendezvous is thus apparent. In effect, the uncorroborated testimony of Nuepe that his wife committed the ultimate act of infidelity was successfully rebutted. His defense, therefore, has no leg to stand on.


D E C I S I O N


SARMIENTO, J.:


The petitioner, Nuepe Wagas y Milan, was accused, and convicted beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime of parricide and ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased, his spouse Victoria Viscaya-Wagas. 1

The information charging the offense reads as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

That on or about the 30th day of April 1981 in the City of Baguio, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously and with evident premeditation, that is having conceived and deliberated to kill his wife VICTORIA WAGAS with whom he was united in lawful wedlock, and being then armed with a bladed instrument, with intent to kill, stab his wife VICTORIA WAGAS and as a result of which attack the said VICTORIA WAGAS received a stabbed wound on her left chest which directly caused instantaneous death.chanrobles.com : virtual law library

Contrary to law. *

In arguing its case, the prosecution presented a phalanx of witnesses who corroborated the circumstance of death as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

At around eleven thirty in the morning of April 30, 1982, the deceased Victoria Wagas, her sister Felisca, and one Paulita, were sitting outside the house of Berta Banis, talking about the strawberry plantation where they had picked berries that morning. 2

Suddenly, the accused, Nuepe Wagas, appeared before them, then slapped Victoria’s right cheek, and said, "Come and get what you want." 3

Thereupon, Nuepe pulled out a knife from his pocket. The women scampered away, shouting for help. 4 As Felisca ran, she looked back and saw that her sister Victoria had fallen into a canal 5 and that Nuepe stabbed her twice. 6

Victoria’s brother, Lamor, who had been chopping firewood, heard the shouts of the women. He ran towards where Felisca stood, and he saw Victoria sprawled on her back and bleeding, while Nuepe was standing about seven to eight meters away from her. 7

Lamor went after Nuepe but the latter ran away. He returned to pick up Victoria and then rushed her to the Baguio General Hospital where she was pronounced dead on arrival.

After Victoria was brought to the hospital, Nuepe went to their house. When the policemen arrived, they found the accused sitting inside the bathroom, with the kitchen knife stained with fresh blood (Exhibit "B" or "2") which he had purportedly used to stab his wife to death and an empty bottle of poison (Folidol) 8 on his side. The policemen got him. He left his knife inside the bathroom.

On the strength of those circumstances fully supported by evidence on record, Nuepe was convicted of parricide, defined and punished as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Article 246. Parricide — Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. 9

The accused-appellant, as the record of the case also shows, did not deny the killing of his spouse. His defense was that the killing had been committed under exceptional circumstances.

He claimed that on that fateful day of April 30, at about eleven o’clock in the morning, he arrived home after selling strawberries in the market, to find Victoria and a certain Jacinto Solano in the master bedroom, engaged in what seemed (to him) like a sexual act. 10

In a fit of fury, he allegedly rushed to the kitchen and armed himself with a knife purportedly to protect himself from the man he caught with his wife and who looked stronger than himself. 11

When he returned to the bedroom, Jacinto had dressed up and had gone out through the window. 12

Giving chase and still failing to catch Jacinto, he decided to return home to confront his wife. 13

He, however, found her not at the family abode, but at the house of Berta Banis. He said he asked her why she had gone to bed with another man, but she only infuriated him when she revealed her plan to separate from him. 14

Hearing that, Nuepe slapped his wife. She ran away, but he followed her to a slope where both of them rolled downhill. Then he noticed that blood was gushing from Victoria’s chest. He was stunned. 15

Still clutching his knife, he went home and closeted himself in the bathroom where he broke down and cried and was later found by the police. 16

The above constitutes the whole and only testimony of the accused; needless to say, the testimony is self-serving.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

On the basis of the paucity of evidence presented by the accused-appellant, the Court upholds the very well-written decision of conviction rendered by the trial judge, the Honorable Salvador J. Valdez, Jr.

The defense of the accused, which is that of causing the death of a person under exceptional circumstances, does not hold water. Article 247 prescribes the following essential elements for such a defense: (1) that a legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person; and (2) that he kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. 17

The death caused must be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the act of infidelity. 18 Simply put, the killing by the husband of his wife must concur with her flagrant adultery. (It can be vice-versa, the wife killing the husband.) In the instant case, there was failure of the defense to prove the alleged discovery of the sexual congress between Victoria and Jacinto Solano. On the contrary, witnesses for the prosecution testified that Victoria had been with them picking berries all morning of that fateful day. Nothing in the record of this case do we find any basis for doubting this testimonial evidence and not appreciating it as sufficient proof of the fact of Victoria’s absence from their house all morning of April 30, 1981. The improbability of the claimed adulterous rendezvous is thus apparent. In effect, the uncorroborated testimony of Nuepe that his wife committed the ultimate act of infidelity was successfully rebutted. His defense, therefore, has no leg to stand on.

It is true that the evidence is replete with testimonies about the turmoil in the Wagas marriage; namely, that the spouses no longer lived together in the same house; 19 that there had been a family dispute submitted for conciliation before the Barangay Council; 20 and that the family elders had been consulted about the frequent marital spats. 21 In addition, Victoria had not been the paragon of virtue, having been seen on several occasions, in familiarities unbecoming of a married woman with four children, with other men like a certain Johnny Diano. 22

This recount of salacious interludes involving his wayward wife, however, would not suffice to tilt the scales of justice in favor of Nuepe. The vindication of a Man’s honor is justified because of the scandal an unfaithful wife creates; the law is strict on this, authorizing as it does, a man to chastise her, even with death. But killing the errant spouse as a purification is so severe as that it can only be justified when the unfaithful spouse is caught in flagrante delicto; and it must be resorted to only with great caution so much so that the law requires that it be inflicted only during the sexual intercourse or immediately thereafter.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

Curiously, Nuepe himself admitted the absence of any feeling of jealousy or remorse, before the killing of his wife. 23 And, as discussed earlier, he was not able to sufficiently establish catching his wife and another man in the sexual act. Thus the issue of whether or not he had killed her immediately thereafter as compelled by Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code becomes irrelevant. Whatever rage provoked Nuepe to kill his wife is not the legal basis contemplated by law in article 247.

WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is AFFIRMED, convicting the accused beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide and imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The indemnity, however, is increased from P12,000.00 to P30,000.00. Costs against the Appellant.

Melencio-Herrera, (Chairman), Paras, Padilla and Regalado, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. People v. Nuepe Wagas, CFI (Baguio and Benguet) Crim. Case No. 2802, April 10, 1.982, Hon. Salvador J. Valdez, presiding judge.

** Original Record, 1.

2. T.s.n., session of July 6, 1981, 2, 8, 10, 22.

3. Id., 3, 17.

4. Id., 4, 5.

5. Id., 4, 21.

6. Id., 4, 5.

7. T.s.n., session of October 26, 1981, 2, 3.

8. T.s.n., session of July 7, 1981, 3.

9. REV. PEN. CODE.

10. T.s.n., session of January 12, 1982, 3, 4.

11. Id., 4.

12. Id., 5.

13. Id.

14. Id., 6; T.s.n., session of December 7, 1981, 13.

15. T.s.n., session of January 12, 1982, 7.

16. Id.

17. People v. Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, September 14, 1987, 153 SCRA 742.

18. Ibid.

19. T.s.n., session of October 26, 1981, 5; t.s.n., session of December 7, 1981, 11.

20. T.s.n., session of January 12, 1982, 8, 9; t.s.n., session of January 25, 1982, 3, 4.

21. T.s.n., session of October 26, 1981, 6.

22. T.s.n., session of December 7, 1981, 17, 18 and 19.

23. T.s.n., session of January 12, 1982, 6.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1989 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 34695 March 7, 1989 - PROVINCIAL BOARD OF CEBU, ET AL. v. PRESIDING JUDGE OF CEBU COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 45330 March 7, 1989 - EXALTACION CAÑETE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 2385 March 8, 1989 - JOSE TOLOSA v. ALFREDO CARGO

  • A.C. No. 2694 March 8, 1989 - MANUEL LEAÑO v. ERNESTO ANDICO

  • G.R. No. 32864 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE R. CASTILLO

  • G.R. No. 34285 March 8, 1989 - B. JOSE CASTILLO v. ONOFRE A. VILLALUZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 41859 March 8, 1989 - CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 47004 March 8, 1989 - MARITIME COMPANY OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61704 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NUEPE M. WAGAS

  • G.R. Nos. 69337-38 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO S. TARUC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 72616-17 March 8, 1989 - FRAMANLIS FARMS, INC., ET AL. v. MINISTER OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72686 March 8, 1989 - JAIME RAMOS, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 73057 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE MADRIAGA IV

  • G.R. No. 74470 March 8, 1989 - NATIONAL GRAINS AUTHORITY, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 78261-62 March 8, 1989 - DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ARIEL C. SANTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78730 March 8, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR LACAP, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82144 March 8, 1989 - RURAL BANK OF SAN MIGUEL (BOHOL), INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83239 March 8, 1989 - PHILIPPINE JAPAN ACTIVE CARBON CORP., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 36391-92 March 9, 1989 - ARTURO REYES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 54161-62 March 9, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO M. YMANA

  • G.R. Nos. 71632-33 March 9, 1989 - METRO PORT SERVICE, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 67634 March 13, 1989 - AGUSAN WOOD INDUSTRIES, INC. v. EDUARDO C. TUTAAN

  • G.R. No. 77423 March 13, 1989 - DIOSDADO NUGUID, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82197 March 13, 1989 - MANUEL L. SIQUIAN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 58094-95 March 15, 1989 - MAMERTO B. ASIS v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 35475 March 16, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DELFIN BUSTOS

  • G.R. No. 57642 March 16, 1989 - BALIWAG TRANSIT, INC. v. BLAS F. OPLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61243 March 16, 1989 - PEDRO CASTAÑEDA v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 64262 March 16, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CELERINO A. VIOLA

  • G.R. No. 66038 March 16, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE LUALHATI

  • G.R. No. 68619 March 16, 1989 - LOURDES SORIANO, ET AL. v. DIEGO P. ATIENZA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69374 March 16, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO ALMARIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 76262-63 March 16, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO G. LAGGUI, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78491 March 16, 1989 - STARLITE PLASTIC INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79907 March 16, 1989 - SAMUEL CASAS LIM v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80685 March 16, 1989 - ALFREDO S. MARQUEZ v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83578 March 16, 1989 - PRESIDENTIAL ANTI-DOLLAR SALTING TASK FORCE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 47354 March 21, 1989 - HORACIO G. ADAZA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61516 March 21, 1989 - FLORENTINA A. GUILATCO v. CITY OF DAGUPAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74903 March 21, 1989 - PERFECTO A.S. LAGUIO, JR. v. CATALINO GAMET, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76093 March 21, 1989 - AIR FRANCE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76552 March 21, 1989 - CHURCH ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, INC. v. VICENTE P. SIBULO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78591 March 21, 1989 - PURE FOODS CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80194 March 21, 1989 - EDGAR JARANTILLA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 82211-12 March 21, 1989 - TERESITA MONTOYA v. TERESITA ESCAYO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 51208 March 29, 1989 - GODOFREDO BACAR v. AMELIA DEL ROSARIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 66645 March 29, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN BACHO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 84462-63 March 29, 1989 - GABRIEL CASIMIRO, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 38669 March 31, 1989 - PARAMOUNT SURETY & INSURANCE CO., INC. v. PASTOR D. AGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 46713 March 31, 1989 - CESAR LACSON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 49529 March 31, 1989 - VALLEY TRADING CO., INC. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ISABELA, BRANCH II, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 55952 March 31, 1989 - COMMODITIES SALES CORPORATION v. LA SUERTE BUS CO., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 60952 March 31, 1989 - LEONILA L. SANTIAGO v. WILSON TAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68873 March 31, 1989 - LUCILDA DAEL, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68898 March 31, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISTOTO LAPAZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69746-47 March 31, 1989 - BANK OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS EMPLOYEES UNION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71311 March 31, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CESAR ESQUILLO

  • G.R. Nos. 71771-73 March 31, 1989 - GOLD CITY INTEGRATED PORT SERVICES, INC. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72975 March 31, 1989 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO JUTIE

  • G.R. No. 74271 March 31, 1989 - MARINERS POLYTECHNIC SCHOOL, ET AL. v. VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 75379 March 31, 1989 - REYNALDO JAVIER, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78209 March 31, 1989 - DAVAO GRAINS INCORPORATED, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82068 March 31, 1989 - SABENA BELGIAN WORLD AIRLINES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85302 March 31, 1989 - BICOL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.