People v. Embalido
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The appellant, Feliciano Embalido, was charged with parricide for killing his wife. He admitted the killing but claimed he surprised his wife in the act of committing adultery. Procedural History: The lower court found the appellant guilty of parricide under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced him to cadena perpetua. The appellant appealed, contending that he should have been sentenced under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code, which provides for the penalty of destierro. The Petition: The appellant argued that his case falls under Article 247, which applies when a legally married person kills their spouse upon surprising them in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another.
Issue(s)
Whether the appellant proved by a preponderance of evidence that he surprised his wife in the act of adultery, thereby entitling him to the penalty of destierro under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code instead of the penalty for parricide.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for parricide but modified the penalty. The Court ruled that the appellant failed to sufficiently prove that he surprised his wife in the act of committing adultery, thus not entitling him to the provisions of Article 247. However, appreciating the mitigating circumstances of illiteracy and voluntary surrender, the penalty was reduced.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Court held that for a defendant to avail of the lesser penalty under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the defense must prove the 'surprise in the act' of adultery by a preponderance of evidence. In this case, the prosecution established the three requirements for parricide: the death of the deceased, the killing by the accused, and the legitimate marital relationship. Once these are proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the burden shifts to the accused to prove any justifying or mitigating circumstances. After a careful consideration of the records, the Court found no sufficient ground to hold that the appellant actually surprised his wife in the act of committing adultery. Consequently, the defense under Article 247 was inapplicable, and the appellant was correctly found guilty of parricide under Article 246. However, the Court appreciated the mitigating circumstances of illiteracy and voluntary surrender in favor of the appellant. Applying Rule 5 of Article 64 in relation to Rule 2 of Article 61 of the RPC, the Court reduced the penalty to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal.
Main Doctrine
The crime of parricide under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code requires proof that the deceased was the legitimate spouse of the accused. Article 247 provides a lesser penalty of destierro for a person who kills their spouse upon surprising them in the act of adultery, but this defense must be proven by a preponderance of evidence. If the defense is not sufficiently proven, the accused is liable for parricide.