People vs. Sabalberino

Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code does not apply as an absolutory cause where the accused fails to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he surprised his spouse in the act of sexual intercourse with another person; the uncorroborated testimony of the accused pales in comparison to the consistent eyewitness accounts of his children who were present at the scene and testified that no third party was present during the fatal altercation.

William Sabalberino and Delia Fernandez-Sabalberino were legally married and resided in Barangay 59, Picas, Sagkahan, Tacloban City, with their five children. William worked as a painter while Delia worked as a laundrywoman. In the early morning hours of August 17, 2005, Delia suffered a fatal stab wound to the chest during an altercation with William inside their home, resulting in her death due to shock and hemorrhage from a wound that penetrated her heart.

• The Stabbing Incident: Around 1:00 a.m. on August 17, 2005, daughters Angela (age 13) and Jessica (age 12) were roused from sleep by their parents shouting at each other. The daughters witnessed their father, William, punch their mother, Delia, on the face. William then proceeded to the kitchen to get a knife and stabbed Delia in the chest below the armpit while the latter was holding Angela and Jessica. Delia managed to stand and walk toward the door but collapsed before reaching the bed. William embraced her and cried, asking the children to call for help, but Delia died soon thereafter.

• The Defense Version: William admitted stabbing Delia but claimed it was accidental. He testified that around midnight, he woke up to urinate and saw his wife half-naked with a completely naked man on top of her in the sala. He got a knife from the kitchen, grappled with the man, and when he gained control of the weapon, he tried to stab the man but accidentally hit his wife when she stood between them. The man allegedly jumped out the window and fled.

• Procedural Findings: The RTC gave credence to the prosecution evidence, finding that the daughters' testimonies established the killing was intentional and occurred during a quarrel, not upon discovery of infidelity. The CA affirmed these factual findings.

• Article 247 as Absolutory Cause: Petitioner maintained that he was entitled to the absolutory cause under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code, arguing that he had surprised his wife in the act of sexual intercourse with another man, that his intention was to kill the paramour, and that the fatal blow to his wife was accidental as she stood between him and the man.

• Mitigating Circumstances: Petitioner argued that even if Article 247 were inapplicable, the trial court erred in failing to appreciate three mitigating circumstances: (1) having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation; (2) voluntary surrender; and (3) lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.

• Sufficiency of Evidence for Parricide: Respondent countered that the prosecution established all elements of parricide through the credible testimonies of the victim's daughters, who witnessed the stabbing, and the accused's own admission that he delivered the fatal blow.

• Rejection of Defenses: Respondent argued that Article 247 was inapplicable because the defense failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the accused surprised his spouse in flagrante delicto. The consistent testimonies of the children that no other man was present directly contradicted the accused's uncorroborated claim. Respondent further contended that the claimed mitigating circumstances were not supported by the evidence.

• Applicability of Article 247: Whether the accused is entitled to the absolutory cause under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code for death under exceptional circumstances.

• Mitigating Circumstances: Whether the mitigating circumstances of passion or obfuscation, voluntary surrender, and lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong should be appreciated in favor of the accused.

• Article 247 Inapplicable: The absolutory cause was not established. Article 247 requires proof by clear and convincing evidence that the accused surprised his spouse in the act of sexual intercourse with another person and killed any of them in the act or immediately thereafter. The uncorroborated testimony of the accused that he discovered his wife with a paramour paled in comparison to the consistent, credible testimonies of his daughters, Angela and Jessica, who stated that no third person was present and that the stabbing occurred during a marital quarrel. The defense failed to prove the vital element of flagrante delicto.

• Passion and Obfuscation: The mitigating circumstance was not established. Passion or obfuscation requires an uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts or a legitimate stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason, originating from lawful feelings. The excitement inherent in a quarrel or fight, no matter how heated, does not constitute obfuscation. The argument between spouses did not constitute the type of legal provocation required to mitigate liability.

• Voluntary Surrender: The requisites for voluntary surrender were not satisfied. For this circumstance to apply, the accused must not have been actually arrested, must have surrendered to a person in authority, and the surrender must have been voluntary, showing spontaneity and an intent to surrender unconditionally. Mere lack of resistance when police officers brought the accused to the station for questioning does not equate to voluntary surrender; voluntariness requires a positive act, not merely compliant or submissive behavior.

• Lack of Intention to Commit Grave Wrong: The circumstance was inapplicable. Intent to kill may be inferred from the weapon used, the extent of injuries, and the circumstances of the aggression. The accused used a deadly weapon and inflicted a mortal wound on the victim's chest, hitting the heart. The location and nature of the wound belied the claim of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.

• Penalty and Damages: The penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Article 63. The awards of P75,000.00 each for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages, and P50,000.00 for temperate damages, all subject to interest at six percent per annum from finality until fully paid, were affirmed.

• Death Under Exceptional Circumstances (Article 247) — This absolutory cause requires the concurrence of three elements: (1) the offender is a legally married person; (2) he surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person and kills any of them or both in the act or immediately thereafter, or inflicts serious physical injury; and (3) he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his spouse or consented to the infidelity. The accused must prove these elements by clear and convincing evidence; otherwise, the defense is untenable.

• Elements of Parricide — The crime is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; and (3) the deceased is the father, mother, child (legitimate or illegitimate), legitimate other ascendant or descendant, or legitimate spouse of the accused. The relationship is the element that distinguishes parricide from homicide, provable by marriage certificate or oral evidence if uncontested.

• Passion and Obfuscation — There is passional obfuscation when the crime is committed due to an uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts or due to a legitimate stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason. The obfuscation must originate from lawful feelings; the excitement inherent in all persons who quarrel and come to blows does not constitute the obfuscation contemplated by law.

• Voluntary Surrender — Three requisites must concur: (1) the offender has not been actually arrested; (2) he surrendered to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (3) the surrender is voluntary, denoting spontaneity and an intent to surrender unconditionally, either because the accused acknowledges guilt or wishes to spare authorities the trouble of capture.

• Credibility of Witnesses — Findings of the trial court on credibility of witnesses, its calibration of testimonies, and its assessment of probative weight, as well as conclusions anchored on said findings, are accorded high respect, if not conclusive effect, by the appellate courts because the trial court has the unique opportunity to observe the demeanor of witnesses and is in the best position to discern whether they are telling the truth.

• "Any legally married person who, having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro." — Text of Article 247, RPC, cited as the statutory basis for the absolutory cause.

• "There is passional obfuscation when the crime was committed due to an uncontrollable burst of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts, or due to a legitimate stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason." — Definition of the mitigating circumstance, emphasizing that the excitement inherent in quarrels does not qualify.

• "When the issues involve matters of credibility of witnesses, the findings of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies, and its assessment of the probative weight thereof, as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings, are accorded high respect, if not conclusive effect." — Principle governing appellate review of factual findings, especially regarding witness credibility.

• "The voluntariness of one's surrender should denote a positive act and not a mere compliant or submissive behavior in the presence of authorities." — Standard for appreciating the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.

• People v. Macal, 778 Phil. 379 (2016) — Cited as controlling precedent for the elements of parricide and the requisites of Article 247 as an absolutory cause, establishing that the accused must prove the elements by clear and convincing evidence.

• People v. Oyanib, 406 Phil. 650 (2001) — Cited for the standard of proof required for Article 247 defenses.

• People v. Sota, G.R. No. 203121, November 29, 2017 — Cited for the doctrine regarding the conclusive effect of trial court findings on witness credibility.

• People v. Oloverio, 756 Phil. 435 (2015) — Cited for the definition and requirements of the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation.

• Roca v. Court of Appeals, 403 Phil. 326 (2001) — Cited for the requisites of voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance.

• People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016) — Cited as basis for the award of damages in criminal cases.

• Article 246, Revised Penal Code — Defines parricide as the killing of a father, mother, child, ascendant, descendant, or legitimate spouse, punishable by reclusion perpetua to death.

• Article 247, Revised Penal Code — Provides the absolutory cause for death or physical injuries under exceptional circumstances (surprising spouse in flagrante delicto), limiting the penalty to destierro.

• Article 63, Revised Penal Code — Rules for the application of divisible penalties, applied in determining the imposition of reclusion perpetua where no mitigating or aggravating circumstances were established.

Leonen, A. Reyes, Jr., Hernando, and Inting, JJ.