G.R. No.

L-45130 February 17, 1937

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, panth-appeee,
vs.
CELESTINO ONO!N " CR#$, defendant-appeant.
Paulino Sevilla, Fernando Arce and Gaudencio Garcia for appellant.
Undersecretary of Justice for appellee.
L!#REL, J.:
On |anuary 5, 1935, the prosecutng attorney of the Cty of Mana ed an nformaton chargng Ceestno Bonoan, the
defendant-appeant heren, wth the crme of murder, commtted as foows:
That on or about the 12th day of December, 1934, n the Cty of Mana, Phppne Isands, the sad accused, wth evdent
premedtaton and treachery, dd then and there wfuy, unawfuy and feonousy, wthout any |ustabe motve and
wth the decded purpose to k one Caros Guson, attack, assaut and stab the sad Caros Guson on the dherent parts of
hs body wth a knfe, thereby nctng upon hm the foowng n|ures, to wt:
"One stab wound at the rght epgastrc regon penetratng one cm. nto the superor surace of the rght obe of the ver;
and three non-penetratng stab wounds ocated respectvey at the posteror and atera umbar regon, and eft ebow",
whch drecty caused the death of the sad Caros Guson three days afterwards.
On |anuary 16, 1935, the case was caed for the arragnment of the accused. The defense counse forthwth ob|ected to
the arragnment on the ground that the defendant was mentay deranged and was at the tme conned n the Psychopatc
Hospta. The court thereupon ssued an order requrng the Drector of the Hospta to render a report on the menta
condton of the accused. Accordngy, Dr. Torbo |oson, assstant aentst, rendered hs report,Exhbt 4, herenbeow
ncorporated. On March 23, 1935, the case was agan caed for the arragnment of the accused, but n vew of the
ob|ecton of the sca, the court ssued another order requrng the doctor of the Psyhopatc Hospta who examned the
defendant to appear and produce the compete record pertanng to the menta condton of the sad defendant. Pursuant
to ths order, Dr. Torbo |oson appeared before the court on March 26, 1935 for the necessary nqury. Thereafter, the
prosecuton and the defense asked the court to summon the other doctors of the hospta for questonng as to the menta
condton of the accused, or to pace the atter under a competent doctor for a coser observaton. The tra court then
ssued an order drectng that the accused be paced under the chef aenst or an assstant aenst of the Psychopatc
Hospta for hs persona observaton and the subsequent submsson of a report as to the true menta condton of the
patent. Dr. |ose A. Fernandez, assstant aenst of the Psychopathc Hospta, rendered hs report, Exhbt 5, on |une 11,
1935. On |une 28, 1935, the case was caed agan. Dr. Fernandez appeared before the court and rated hs report, Exhbt
5, statng that the accused was not n a condton to defend hmsef. In vew thereof, the case was suspended ndentey.
On |anuary 21, 1936, Dr. Dr. Fernandez reported to the court that the defendant coud be dscharged from the hospta and
appear for tra, as he was "consdered a recovered case." Summoned by the court, Dr. Fernandez, appeared and tested
that the accused "had recovered from the dsease." On February 27, 1936, the accused was arragned, peaded "not guty"
and tra was had.
After tra, the ower court found the defendant guty of the ohense charged n the nformaton above-quoted and
sentenced hm to fe mprsonment, to ndemnfy the hers of the deceased n the sum of P1,000, and to pay the costs.
The defendant now appeas to ths court and hs counse makes the foowng assgnment of errors:
A. The court a quo erred n ndng that the evdence estabshes that the accused has had dementia ony occasonay and
ntermttenty and has not had t mmedatey pror to the commsson of the defense.
B. The court a quo erred n ndng that the evdence n ths case further shows that durng and mmedatey after the
commsson of the ohense, the accused dd not show any knd of abnormaty ether n behavor, anguage and
appearance, or any knd of acton showng that he was mentay deranged.
C. The court a quo erred n decarng that under the crcumstances that burden was on the defense to show hat the
accused was mentay deranged at the tme of the commsson of the ohense, and that the defense dd not estabsh any
evdence to ths ehect.
D. The court a quo n ndng the accused guty of the ohense charged and n not acquttng hm thereof.
It appears that n the mornng of December 12, 1934, the defendant Ceestno Bonoan met the now deceased Caros
Guson on Avenda Rza near a barbershop cose to Tom's Dxe Ktchen. Francsco Beech, who was at the tme n the
barbershop, heard the defendant say n Tagaog, "I w k you." Beech turned around and saw the accused wthdrawng
hs rght hand, whch hed a knfe, from the sde of Guson who sad, aso n Tagaog, "I w pay you", but Bonoan reped
sayng that he woud k hm and then stabbed Guson thrce on the eft sde. The assautt was wtnessed by poceman
Damaso Arnoco who rushed to the scene and arrested Bonoan and took possesson of the knfe, Exhbt A. Guson was
taken to the Phppne Genera Hospta where he ded two days ater. Exhbt C s the report of the autopsy performed on
December 15, 1934, by Dr. Sxto de os Angees.
As the kng of the deceased by the defendant-appeant s admtted, t does not seem necessary to nduge n any
1
extended anayss of the testmony of the wtnesses for the prosecuton. The defense set up beng that of nsanty, the ony
queston to be determned n ths appea s whether or not the defendant-appeant was nsane at the tme of the
commsson of the crme charged.
On the queston of nsanty as a defense n crmna cases, and the ncdenta coroares as to the ega presumpton and
the knd and quantum of evdence requred, theores abound and authortes are n sharp conct. Stated generay, courts
n the Unted States proceed upon three dherent theores. (See Herzog, Afred W., Medca |ursprudence |1931|, sec.
655 et seq., p. 479 et seq.; also Lawson, Insanty n Crmna Cases, p. 11et seq.) The frst view s that nsanty as a defense
n a confesson and avodance and as must be proved beyond reasonabe doubt when the commsson of a crme s
estabshed, and the defense of nsanty s not made out beyond a reasonabe doubt, convcton foows. In other words,
proof of nsanty at the tme of commttng the crmna act shoud be cear and satsfactory n order to acqut the accused
on the ground of nsanty (Hornbower, C. |., n State vs. Spencer, 21 N. |. L., 196). The second view s that an amrmatve
verdct of nsanty s to be governed by a preponderance of evdence, and n ths vew, nsanty s not to be estabshed
beyond a reasonabe doubt. Accordng to Wharton n hs "Crmna Evdence" (10th ed.,vo. I, sec. 338), ths s the rue n
Engand (Reg. vs. Layton, 4 Cox, C. C., 149; Reg. vs. Hggnson, 1 Car. & K., 130), and n Aabama, Arkansas, Caforna,
Georga, Idaho, Iowa, Kentucky, Lousana, Mane, Massachusetts, Mchgan, Mnnesota, Mssour, Nevada, New |ersey, New
York, North Carona, Oho, Pennsyvana, South Carona, Texas, Vrgna and West Vrgna. Thethird view s that the
prosecuton must prove santy beyond a reasonabe doubt (Das vs. Unted States, 160 U. S. 496; 40 Law. ed., 499; 16 Sup.
Ct. Rep., 353; Hotema vs. Unted States, 186 U. S., 413; 46 Law. ed., 1225; 22 Sup. Ct. Rep., 895; Unted States vs.
Lancaster, 7 Bss., 440; Fed. Cas. No. 15,555; Unted States vs. Faukner, 35 Fed., 730). Ths bera vew s premsed on the
proposton that whe t s true that the presumpton of santy exsts at the outset, the prosecuton amrms every essenta
ngredents of the crme charged, and hence amrms santy as one essenta ngredents, and that a fortiori where the
accused ntroduces evdence to prove nsanty t becomes the duty of the State to prove the santy of the accused beyond
a reasonabe doubt.
In the Phppnes, we have approxmated the rst and strcter vew (Peope vs. Bacos |1922|, 44 Ph., 204). The burden, to
be sure, s on the prosecuton to prove beyond a reasonabe doubt that the defendant commtted the crme, but nsanty s
presumed, and ". . . when a defendant n a crmna case nterposes the defense of menta ncapacty, the burden of
estabshng that fact rests upon hm. . . ." (U. S. vs. Martnez |1916|, 34 Ph., 305, 308, 309; U. S. vs. Bascos, supra.) We
amrm and reterate ths doctrne.
In the case at bar, the defense nterposed beng that the defendant was nsane at the tme he ked the deceased, the
obgaton of provng that amrmatve aegaton rests on the defense. Wthout ndugng n ne dstnctons as to the
character and degree of evdence that must be presented sumcenty convncng evdence, drect or crcumstanta, to a
degree that satses the |udca mnd that the accused was nsane at the tme of the perpetraton of the ohense? In order
to ascertan a person's menta condton at the tme of the act, t s permssbe to receve evdence of the condton of hs
mnd a reasonabe perod both before and after that tme. Drect testmony s not requred (Wharton, Crmna Evdence, p.
684; State vs. Wrght, 134 Mo., 404; 35 S. W., 1145; State vs. Smms, 68 Mo., 305; Rnkard vs. State, 157 Ind., 534; 62 N.
E., 14; Peope vs. Trper, I Wheeer, Crm. Cas., 48), nor are specc acts of derangement essenta (Peope vs.
Trper, supra) to estabshed nsanty as a defense. Mnd can ony be known by outward acts. Thereby, we read the
thoughts, the motves and emotons of a person and come to determne whether hs acts conform to the practce of peope
of sound mnd. To prove nsanty, therefore, ccumstanta evdence, f cear and convncng, sumce (Peope vs. Bascos
|1922|, 44 Ph., 204).
The tra |udge arrved at the concuson that the defendantwas not nsane at the tme of the commsson of the act for
whch he was prosecuted on the theory that the nsanty was ony occassona or ntermttent and not permanentor
contnuous (32 C. |., sec. 561, p. 757). We are apprased of the danger of ndugng n the preseumpton ofcontnuty n
cases of temporary or spasmodc nsanty.We apprecate the reason forthe contrary rue. To be sure, courts shoud be
carefu to dstngush nsanty n aw from passon or eccentrcty, menta weakness or mere depresson resutng from
physca ament. The State shoud guard aganst sane murderers escapng punshment through a genera pea of nsanty.
In the case at bar, however, we are not cconcerned wth connectng two or more attacks of nsanty to show the
contnuance thereof durng the ntervenng perod or perods but wth the contnuty of a partcuar and soated attack
pror to the commsson of the crme charged, and endng wth a postve dagnoss of nsanty mmedatey foowng the
commsson of the act companed of. Upon the other hand, there are facts and crcumstances of record whch can not be
overooked.The foowng consderatons have weghed heavy upon the mnds of the ma|orty of ths court n arrvng at a
concuson dherent from that reached by the court beow:.
(a) From the evdence presented by the defense, uncontradcted by the prosecuton, t appears that the heren defendant-
appeant, durng the perods from Apr 11 to Apr 26, 1922, and from |anuary 6 to |anuary 10, 1926, was conned n the
nsane department of the San Lazaro Hospta suherng from a dsease dagnosed as dementia prco!. Hs connement
durng these perods, t s true, was ong before the commsson of the ohense on December 12, 1934, but ths s a
crcumstance whch tends to show that the recurrence of the ament at the tme of the occurence of the crme s not
entrey ackng of any ratona or scentc foundaton.
(") A persons suherng from dementia prco! are ceary to be regarded as havng menta dsease to a degree that
dsquaes them for ega responsbty for ther actons (Menta Dsorder n Medco-Lega Reatons by Dr. Abert M. Barrett
n Peterson, Hanes and Webster, Lega Medcne and Toxoogy, vo. I, p. 613). Accordng to Dr. Eas Domngo, chef aenst
of the Insuar Psychopathc Hospta, the symptoms ofdementia prco!, n certan peerods of exctement, are smar to
2
those of manic depresive psychosis (p. 19, t. s. n.) and, n ether case, the mnd appears "deterorated" because, "when a
person becomes ahected by ths knd of dsease, ether dementia prco! or manic depresive psychosis, durng the perod
of exctement, he has no contro whatever of hs acts." (P. 21, t. s. n.) Even f vewed under the genera medco-ega
casscaton of manc-depressve nsanty, "t s argey n reaton wth the queston of rrestbe mpuse that forensc
reatons of manc actons w have to be consdered. There s n ths dsorder a pathoogc essenng or norma nhbtons
and the case wth whch mpuses may ead to actons mpars deberatons and the use of norma checks to motor
mpuses" (Peterson, Hanes and Webster, Lega Medcne and Toxoogy |2d ed., 1926|, vo, I, p. 617).
(c) Accordng to the uncontradcted testmony of Dr. Ceedono S. Francsco, at one tme an nterne at San LazaroHospta,
for four (4) days mmedatey precedng December 12, 1934 - the date when the crme was commtted - the defendant
and appeant had "an attack of nsomna", whch s one of the symptoms of, and may ead to, dementia prco! (Exhbt 3,
defense testmony of Dr. Ceedono S. Francsco, pp. 13, 14, t. s. n.).
(d) The defendant-appeant appears to have been arrested and taken to the poce staton on the very same day of the
perpetraton of the crme, and athough attempted were made by detectves to secure a statement from hm (see Exhbt B
and D and testmony of Chares Strabe, t. s. n. pp. 9, 10) he was sent by the poce department to the Psychopathc
Hospta the day foowng the commsson of the crme. Ths s an ndcaton that the poce authortes themseves
doubted the menta normacy of the acused, whch doubt found conrmaton n the omca reports submtted by the
specasts of the San Lazaro Hospta.
(e) Accordng to the report (Exhbt 4) of the aenst n charge, Dr. Torbo |oson, whch report was made wthn the rst
month of treatment, the defendant was suherng from a form of psychoss, caed manic depressive psychosis.We quote
the report n fu:
INSULAR PSYCHOPATIC HOSPITAL
MANDALUYONG, RIZAL
January #$, #%&$.
MEMORANDUM FOR: The chef Aenst, Insuar Psychopatc
Hospta, Mandauyong, Rza.
SUB|ECT: Patent Ceestno Bonoan, mae,
Fpno, 30 years od, sent by the
Secret Servce of the Cty of Mana
for menta examnton.
1. MENTAL STATUS:
(a) General "ehavior. - The patent s undetectve, stayng most of the tme n hs bed wth hs eyes cosed and practcay
totay motoness. At other tmes, however, but on very rare occassons and at short ntervas he apparenty wakes up and
then he waks around, and makes sgns and rtuastc movements wth the extremtes and other parts of the body.
Ordnary he takes hs mea but at tmes he refuses to take even the food ohered by hs mother or sster, so that there
have been days n the hospta when he dd not take any nourshment. On severa occassons he refused to have the bath,
or to have hs har cut and beard shaved, and thus appear untdy. He woud aso sometmes refuse hs medcne, and
durng some of the ntervas he dspayed mpusve acts, such as strckng hs chest or other parts of the body wth hs sts
and at one tme after a short ntervew, he struck strongy wth hs st the door of the nurse's omce wthout apparent
motvaton. He aso sometmes aughs, or smes, or caps hs hands strongy wthout provocaton.
(") Stream of tal'. - Usuay the patent s speechess, can't be persuaded to speak, and woud not answer n any form the
questons propounded to hm. Very often he s seen wth hs eyes cosed apparenty prayng as he was mumbng words
but woud not answer at a when taked to. At one tme he was seen n ths condton wth a cross made of sma peces of
strck n hs hand. He at tmes durng the ntervews rected passages n the terature as for exampe the foowng.
"La vrtud y as buenas costumbres son a verdadera nobeza de hombre. (Truthfuness, honesty and oyaty are among the
attrbutes of a dependabe character.)"
At one tme he tred to recte the mass n a very oud voce n the hospta.
(c) (ood. - Patent s usuay apathetc and ndherent but at tmes he ooks anxous and rather rrtabe. He hmsef states
that the often fees sad n the hospta.
(d) )rientation. - Durng the perods that he was acccessbe he was found orented as to pace and person but he dd not
know the day or the date.
3
(e) *llusion and hallucination. - The patent states that durng the nghts that he coud not seep he coud hear voces
teng hm many thngs. Voces, for exampe, tod that he shoud escape. That he was gong to be ked because he was
benevoet. That he coud sometmes see the shadow of hs former sweetheart n the hospta. There are tmes however
when he coud not hear or see at a anythng.
(f ) +elusion and misinterpretation. - On one occasson he tod the examner that he coud not tak n hs rst day n the
hospta because of a mass he fet he had n hs throat. He sometmes thnks that he s aready dead and aready bured n
the La Loma Cemetery.
(,) -ompulsive phenomena. - None.
(h) (emory. - The patent has a fary good memory for remote events, but hs memory for recent events or for exampe,
for events that took pace durng hs stay n the hospta he has no recoecton at a.
(i) Grasp of ,eneral informartion. - He has a fary good grasp of genera nformaton. He coud not, however, do smpe
numera tests as the 100-7 test.
( .) *nsi,ht and .ud,ment. - At hs fary cear perods he stated that he mght have been nsane durng hs rst days n the
hospta, but |ust durng the ntervew on |anuary 14, 1935, he fet fary we. Insght and |udgment were, of course, n
durng hs stuporous condton. Durng the ast two days he has shown marked mprovement n hs behavor as to be
cooperatve, and coherent n hs speech.
2. OPINION AND DIAGNOSIS:
The patent durng hs connement n the hospta has been found suherng from a form of physchoss, caed (anic
depressive psychosis.
(Sgd.) TORIBIO |OSON, M. D.
Assistant Alienist
In the subsequent report, dated |une 11, 1935 (Exhbt 5), ed by Dr. |ose A. Fernandez, another assstant aenst n the
Insuar Pshychopatc Hospta, the foowng concuson was reached:
I am of the opnon that actuay ths patent s sck. He s suherng from the Manc Depressve form of psychoss. It mght
be premature to state before the court has decded ths case, but I beeve t a duty to state, that ths person s not safe to
be at arge. He has a pecuar personaty make-up, a personaty ackng n contro, overty serous n hs deangs wth the
every day events of ths earthy word, takng |ustce wth hs own hands and many tmes executng t n an mpusve
manner as to make hs acton over proportonate - beyond norma acceptance. He s senstve, overty regous, too
deastc has taste and desres as to make hm queer before the average concepton of an earthy man.
He w aways have troubes and dmcuates wth ths word of reates.
(Sgd.) |. A. Fernandez, M. D.
Assistant Alienist
To prove motve and premedtaton and, ndrecty, menta normacy of the accused at the tme of the commsson of the
crme, the prosecuton caed on poceman Damaso Arnoco. Arnoco tested that upon arrestng the defendant-appeant
he nqured from the atter for the reason for the assaut and the defendant-appeant reped that the deceased Guson
owed hm P55 and woud pay; that appeant bought the knfe, Exhbt A, for 55 centavos n Tabora Street and that for two
days he had been watchng for Guson n order to k hm (pp. 5, 6, t. s. n.). Ben|amn Cruz, a detectve, was aso caed
and corroborated the testmony of poceman Arnoco. That such knd of evdence s not necessary proof of the santy of
the accused durng the commsson of the ohense, s cear from what Dr. Sydney Smth, Regus Professor of Forensc
Medcne, Unversty of Ednburg, sad n hs work on Forensc Medcne (3d ed. |London|, p. 382), that n the type
of dementia prco!, "the crme s ussuay preceded by much complainin, and plannin,. In these peope, homcda attcks
are common, because of deusons that they are beng nterfered wth sexuay or that their property is "ein, ta'en."
In vew of the foregong, we are of the opnon that the defendant-appeant was demented at the tme he perpetrated the
serous ohense charged n the nformaton and that conseuenty he s exempt from crmna abty. Accordngy, the
|udgment of the ower court s hereby reversed, and the defendant-appeant acqutted, wth costs de ofcio n both
nstances. In conformnty wth paragraph 1 of artce 12 of the Revsed Pena Code, the defendant sha kept n connement
n the San Lazaro Hospta or such other hospta for the nsane as may be desganted by the Drector of the Phppne
Heath Servce, there to reman conned unt the Court of Frst Instance of Mana sha otherwse order or decree. So
4
ordered.
Avance/a, -.J., 0illa12eal and A"ad Santos, JJ., concur.
Se%ara&e O%'('o()
I*PERI!L, J., dssentng:
I agree wth the dssentng opnons of Hustces Daz and Concepcon.
There s not queston as to the facts consttutng the crme mputed to the accused. The dsagreement arses from the
concusons whch both opnons attempt to nfer therefrom. The ma|orty opnon estabshes the concuson that the
accused was not n hs sound mnd when he commtted the crme because he was then suherng fromdementia prco!.
The dssentng opnons, n estabshng the concuson that the accused was then n the possesson of hs menta factes,
or, at eats, at a ucd nterva, are based on the fact admtted by the partes and supported by expert testmony, that the
accused, before the commsson of the crme, had been cured ofdementia prco! and ater of manc depressve psychoss.
The ma|orty opnon admts that there s no postve evdence regardng the manta state of the accused when he comtted
the crme, but t nfers from the facts that he must have then been deprved of hs reason. Ths nference s not sumcenty
supported by the crcumtanta evdence. I t s admtted that the ega presumpton s that a person who commts a crme
s n hs rght mnd (U. S. vs. Hontveros Carmona, 18 Ph., 62; U. S. vs. Guevara, 27 Ph., 547; U. S. vs. Zamora, 32 Ph.,
218; U. S. vs. Martnez, 34 Ph., 305; Peope vs. Bascos, 44 Ph., 204), because the aw presumes a acts and ommssons
punshabe by aw to be vountary (art. 1, Pena Code; artce 4, subsecton 1, Revsed Pena Code), and f, as t appears,
there s sumcent or satsfactory evdence that the accused was mentay ncapactated when he commtted the crme, the
concuson of fact must be the same presumpton estabshed by aw, that s, that he was n hs rght mnd, and the
concuson of aw must be that he s crmna abe.
There s another deta worth mentonng whch s that no credt was gven to the concusons of fact arrved at by the
|udge who tred the case. He observed and heard the wtnesses who tested and he had the advantage of testng ther
credbty nearby. After weghng a the evdence he arrved at the concuson that the accused commtted the crme whe
he was n hs rght mnd. Ths court generay gves much weght to the concusons of fact of the |udge who tred the case
n the rst nstance and does not re|ect them useess they are ceary n conct wth the evdence.
+I!$, J., dssentng:
I do not agree to the ma|orty opnon. The appeant commtted the crme whe he was sane, or at east, durng a ucd
nterva. He dd not k hs vctm wthout rhyme or reason and ony for the sake of kng hm. He dd so to avenge hmsef
or to punsh hs vctm for havng refused, accordng to hm, to pay a debt of P55 after havng made hm many promses.
He so stated ceary to the poceman who arrested hm mmedatey after the ncdent; and he made t so understood to
the wtness Marano Yamson, a frend of both the appeant and hs vctm, before the commsson of the crme.
The aw presumes that everybody s n hs sound mnd because ordnary such s hs norma condton. Insanty s an
excepton whch may be sad to exst ony when theres satsfactory evdence estabshng t and t certany s not aways
permanent because there are cases n whch t comes and takes pace ony occasonay and asts more or ess tme
accordng to the crcumstances of the ndvdua, that s, the condton of hs heath, hs envronment, and the other
contrbutory causes thereof. The aw tsef recognzes ths, so much so that n estabshng the rue that nsane persons are
excempt from crmna abty, because they commt no crme, t aso makes the excepton that ths s true ony when they
have not acted durng a ucd ntervas (art. 12, subsec. 1, of the Revsed Pena Code).
The appeant was amcted wth nsanty ony for a few days durng the months stated n the ma|orty opnon; Apr 1922
and |anuary 1926, but he was ater pronounced cured n the hospta where he had been conned because he had aready
returned to normacy by recoverng hs reason. For ths one fact aone, nstead of statng that he acted durng a ucd
nterva on sad occason, t shoud be sad on the contrary, takng nto consderaton the expanatons gven by hm to the
pocemen who arrested hm and to other wtnesses for the prosecuton wth whom he had been takng before and after
the ncdent, that he acted whe n the fu possesson of hs menta facutes.
The fact that the appeant was acted wth manc depressve psychoss after the crme, as certed by Drs. Torbo |oson,
|. A. Fernandez and Eas Domngo who examned hm, does not prove that he was so amcted on the date and at the tme
of the commsson of the crme nor that sad ament, takng for granted that he was suherng therefrom, had deprved hm
of hs reason to such an extent that he coud not account for hs acts.
There s no evdence of record to show that the appeant was actuay nsane when he commtted the crme or that he
contnued to be amcted wth sad ament for whch he had to be conned n the nsane asyum for some days durng the
months above-stated, n 1922 and 1926. The most reasonabe rue whch shoud be adopted n these cases s the one
foowed by varous courts of the Unted States stated n 32 C. |., 757, secton 561, and 16 C. |., 538, 539, secton 1012 as
foows:
If the nsanty, admtted, or proved, s ony occassona or ntermttent n ts nature, the presumpton of ts contnuance
does not arse, and he who rees on such nsanty proved at another tme must prove ts exstence aso at the tme
aeged. (32 C. |., 757, sec. 561.)
5
Where t s shown that defendant had ucd ntervas, t w be presumed that the ohense was commtted n one of them. A
person who has been ad|udged nsane, or who has been commtted to a hospta or to an asyum for the nsane, s
presumed to contnue nsane; but as n the case of pror nsanty generay, a pror ad|udcaton of nsanty does not rase a
presumpton of contnued nsanty, where the nsanty s not of a permanent or contnung character, or where, for a
consderabe perod of tme, the person has been on paroe from the hospta or asyum to whch he was commtted, or
where he escaped from the asyum at a tme when he was about to be dscharged. (16 C. |., 538, 539, sec. 1012.)
On the other hand, n Cevenger's Medca |rusprudence of Insanty (vo. 1, pp. 482 and 484, the foowng appears:
Ftfu and exceptona attacks of nsanty are not presumed to be contnuous. And the exstence of pror or subsequent
unacy, except where t s habtua, does not sumce to change the burden of proof. And where an nsane person has ucd
ntervas ohenses commtted by hm w be presumed to have been commtted n a ucd ntervas uness the contrary
appears. The maxm "Once nsane presumed aways to be nsane" does not appy where the maady or deuson under
whch the aeged nsane person abored was n ts nature accdenta or temporary, or the ehect of some sckness or
dsease.
And n order to rase a presumpton of contnuance t must be of permanent type or a contnung nature or possessed of
the characterstcs of an habtua and conrmed dsorder of the mnd. And t must appear to have been of such duraton
and character as to ndcate the probabty of ts contnuance, and not smpy the possbty or probabty of ts
recurrence. And there shoud be some evdence tendng to show setted nsanty as contradstngushed from temporary
aberraton or haucnaton, to |ustfy an nstructon whch does nor recognze such a dstncton.
It s aeged that the appeant was suherng from nsoma before he commtted the crme n queston. Such condton does
not necessary prove that on the day n queston he was actuay nsane. Insoma, accordng to Dr. Eas Domngo, s not an
excusve symptom of nsanty; other dseases and aments aso have t (t. s. n., p.19).
In vew of the foregong consderatons and of those stated n the dssentng opnon of |ustce Concepcon, I vote for the
amrmance of the appeaed sentence, because n my opnon t s supported by the evdence and n accordance wth aw.
CONCEPCION, J., dssentng:
I dssent: Above a, I wsh to state: (1) that the crme commtted by the accused s an admtted fact; and (2) that I adhere
to the statement of the ma|orty that t s setted n ths |ursdcton that a defense based upon the nsanty of the accused
shoud be estabshed by means of cear, ndubtabe and satsfactory evdence.
On December 12, 1934, the accused stabbed the deceased Caros Guson who, as a resut the wounds receved by hm,
ded n the hospta two days after the aggresson.
It s aeged that the accused was nsane at the tme he commtted ths crme. What evdence s there of record n support
of ths defense? Menton has been made of the fact that the accused had been conned n the san Lazaro Hospta and
ater n the Psychopathc Hospta. He was conned n the San Lazaro Hospta from Apr 11 to Apr 26, 1922. He returned
to the hospta on |anuary 6, 1926, and eft on the 10th of sad month and years. Dr Eas Domngo, chef aenst of the
Psychopathc Hospta was questoned as foows:
O. When he eft the hospta, can you state whether he was aready competey cured of hs nsanty? - A. He wassocay
ad|ustabe.
O. What do you mean by socay ad|ustabe? - A. That he coud adapt hmsef to envronment.
There s no evdence that from the month of |anuary, 1926, when he was decared cured at the Psychopathc Hospta, to
December 12, 1934, the date of the crme, he had shown sgns of havng had a reapse. Therefore t s a proven fact durng
the ong perod of nne years the accused had been sane.
It s aeged, however, that four days before the crme the accused was under treatment by Dr. Ceedono S. Francsco
because he was suherng from nsoma. Dr. Francsco admtted that he was not a specast n menta dseases. He s,
therefore, dsquaed from testfyng satsfactory on the menta condton of the accused four days before the crme; and
n fact nether has Dr. Francsco gven any convncng testmony to prove that when the accused was under treatment by
hm he was suherng from dementia prco!, as the ony thng he sad was that the accused-appeant had an attack of
nsoma whch s one of the symptoms of and may ead to dementia prco! (Exhbt 3; t. s. n., pp. 13, 14). Ths s not an
amrmaton of a fact but of a mere possbty. The nnoncence of the accused cannot be based on mere theores or
possbtes. To prove nsanty as a defense, matera, ncontrovertbe facts, athough crcumstanta, are necessary.
On the contrary the evdence shows that on the day the accused commtted the crme he taked and behaved as an
entrey norma man. Pocemen Damaso T. Arnoco and Ben|amn Cruz tested that the accused, after havng been asked
why he had attacked Caros Guson, reped that t was because Guson owed hm P55 for a ong tme and dd not pay hm.
The accused stated that he bought the knfe wth whch he had stabbed Guson on Tabora Street for fty centavos and he
had been watng for two days to k Guson. The accused took hs dnner at noon on December 12th. The statement of the
accused whch was taken n wrtng by detectves Chares Strube and Manao on December12th was eft unnshed
because Cruz of the Bureau of Labor arrved and tod the accused not to be a foo and not to make any statement.
Thereafter the accused refused to contnue hs statement. A of these show that on that day the accused behaved as a
sane man and he even appeared to be prudent, knowng how to take advantage of advce favorabe to hm, as that gven
6
hm by Cruz of the Bureau of Labor. Furthermore t cannot be sad hat the accused had stabbed Guson through
haucnaton because t s an estabshed fact that hs vctm reay owed hm money as conrmed by the fact that when
Guson was stabbed he cred to the accused "I am gong to pay you", accordng to the testmony of an eyewtness.
Therefore the motve of the aggresson was a rea and postve fact: vengeance.
Some days after the commsson of the crme, the accused was paced under observaton n the Psychopathc Hospta
because he showed symptoms of a form of psychoss caed depressve psychoss from whch he had aready been cured
when the case was tred. Ths pyschoss s of course evdence that the accused was amcted wth ths ament after the
commsson of the crme. It woud not be casua to amrm that the commsson of the crme had ahected hs reason.
Nervous shock s one of the causes of nsanty (Angees, Lega Medcne, p. 728); but t cannot be ogcay nferred
therefrom that the accused was aso mentay deranged on the day of the crme, asde from the cscumstance that the
evdence shows |ust the contrary. I am, therefore, of the opnon that the appeaed sentence shoud be amrmed.
G.R. No. L-33,11 -u(e ,9, 19.1
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, panth-appeee,
vs.
ERNESTO P#NO y FILO*ENO, Accused whose death sentence s under revew.
!/#INO, J.:
Ths s a murder case where the accused nterposed as a defense the exemptng crcumstance of nsanty.
There s no doubt that at about two o'cock n the afternoon of September 8, 1970, Ernesto Puno, 28, a |eepney drver,
entered a bedroom n the house of Francsca Co (Ang Kkay), 72, a wdow. The house was ocated n the area known as
Ltte Baguo, Barro Tna|eros Maabon, Rza
On seeng Ang Kkay sttng n bed, Puno nsuted her by sayng: "Mangkukuam ka mambabarang mayroon kang
bubuyog". Then, he repeatedy sapped her and struck her severa tmes on the head wth a hammer unt she was dead.
The assaut was wtnessed by Hara de a Cruz, 23, who was n the bedroom wth the od woman, and by Lna Pa|es, 27, a
tenant of the ad|onng room. They tested that Puno's eyes were reddsh. Hs ook was baefu and menacng. Puno was a
neghbor of Ang Kkay.
After the kng, Puno went to the room of Lna, where Hara had taken refuge, and, accordng to Hara, he made the
foowng confesson and threat: "Huwag kayong magkakamang tumawag ng pus at sabhn nnyo na umas kayo ng
bahay at hnd nnyo aam kung sno ang pumatay sa matanda." Or, accordng to Lna, Puno sad: "Pnatay ko na yong
matanda. Huwag kayong tumawag ng pus. Pag tumawag kayo ng pus, kayo ang paghhganthan ko. "
After the kng, Puno ed to hs parents' house at Barro Tugatog, Maabon and then went to the house of hs second
cousn, Teotmo Puno, ocated at Barro San |ose, Caumpt, Buacan, reachng that pace n the evenng. How he was abe
to go to that pace, whch was then ooded, s not shown n the record.
Dsregardng Puno's threat, Lna, after notng that he had eft, noted the Maabon poce of the kng. Corpora Dane B.
Cruz answered the ca. He found Ang Kkay sprawed on her bed aready dead, Her head was boody. Her banket and
pows were boodstaned. He took down the statements of Lna and Hara at the poce staton. They ponted to Puno as
the ker (pp. 15- 17, Record).
A medco-ega omcer of the Natona Bureau of Investgaton conducted an autopsy. He certed that the vctm had
acerated wounds on her rght eyebrow and contusons on the head caused by a hard nstrument, On openng the sku, the
doctor found extensve and generazed hemorrhage. The cause of death was ntracrana, traumatc hemorrhage (Exh. A).
Puno's father surrendered hm to the poce. Two Maabon pocemen brought hm to the Natona Menta Hospta n
Mandauyong, Rza on September 10, 1970 (p. 14, Record). He was charged wth murder n the muncpa court. He waved
the second stage of the premnary nvestgaton.
On October 21, 1970, he was ndcted for murder n the Crcut Crmna Court at Pasg, Rza. Aeged n the nformaton as
aggravatng crcumstances were evdent premedtaton, abuse of superorty and dsregard of sex.
Puno, a natve of Macabebe, Pampanga, who tested about ve months after the kng, pretended that he dd not
remember havng ked Ang Kkay- He beeves that there are persons who are "mangkukuam," "mambabarang" and
"mambubuyog and that when one s vctmzed by those persons, hs feet mght shrnk or hs hands mght swan. Puno
beeves that a person harmed by a "mambabarang" mght have a headache or a sweng nose and ears and can be cured
ony by a quack doctor (her"olaryo). Consequenty, t s necessary to k the "mangkukuam" and "mambabarang".
Puno s the thrd chd n a famy of tweve chdren. He s marred wth two chdren. He nshed thrd year hgh schoo. Hs
father s a weder. Among hs frends are drvers. (Exh- B).
7
Zenada Gabre, 30, Puno's wfe, tested that on the nght before the murder, Puno's eyes were reddsh. He companed of
a headache. The foowng day whe he was feedng the pgs, he tod Zenada that a bumbe bee was comng towards hm
and he warded t oh wth hs hands. Zenada dd not see any bee.
Puno then went upstars and took the cord of the regous habt of hs mother. He wanted to use that cord n tyng hs dog.
He asked for another rope when Zenada admonshed hm not to use that cord. Puno ted the dog to a tree by oopng the
rope through ts mouth and over ts head. He repeatedy boxed the dog.
Ada Gabre, Zenada's eder sster, saw Puno whe he was boxng that dog. Ada observed that Puno's eyes were
boodshot and hs countenance had a ferocous expresson.
Teotmo Puno tested that on the nght of September 8, 1970, Ernesto Puno came to ther house n Barro San |ose,
Caumpt. Ernesto was soakng wet as there was a ood n that pace. He was cuddng a puppy that he caed "Dabo". He
caed for Teotmo's mother who nvted hm to eat. Ernesto dd not eat. Instead, he fed the puppy.
Ernesto ntroduced Teotmo to hs puppy. Then, he sang an Engsh song. When Teotmo asked hm to change hs wet
cothes, Ernesto refused. Later, he tred on the cothes of Teotmo's father. When tod that Teotmo's father had been dead
for a coupe of years aready, Ernesto |ust ooked at Teotmo.
Whe he was yng down, Ernesto began sngng agan. Then he emtted a moanng sound unt he fe aseep. Ernesto was
awakened the next mornng by the nose caused by persons wadng n the ood. Ernesto thought they were hs
feow cursillistas.
The defense presented three psychatrsts. However, nstead of provng that puno was nsane when he ked Ang Kkay,
the medca experts tested that Puno acted wth dscernment.
Thus, Doctor Arace Marava of the Psychatry Secton of the Dr. |ose R. Reyes Memora Hospta, to whom Puno was
referred for treatment ten tmes between September 8, 1966 and |uy 24, 1970, tested that Puno was an out-patent who
coud very we ve wth socety, athough he was amcted wth "schzophrenc reacton"; that Puno knew what he was
dong and that he had psychoss, a sght destructon of the ego. Puno admtted to Doctor Marava that one cause of hs
restessness, seepessness and rrtabty was hs nanca probem (7 tsn November 4, 1970). Doctor Marava observed
that Puno on |uy 4, 1970 was aready cured.
Doctor Reynado Robes of the Natona Menta Hospta tested that Puno was rst brought to that hospta on |uy 28,
1962 because hs parents companed that he aughed aone and exhbted certan eccentrctes such as kneeng, prayng
and makng hs body rgd. Doctor Robes observed that whe Puno was suherng from "schzophrenc reacton", hs
symptoms were "not socay ncapactatng" and that he coud ad|ust hmsef to hs envronment (4 tsn |anuary 20, 1971).
He agreed wth Doctor Marava's testmony.
Doctor Caros Vcente, a medca specast of the Natona Menta Hospta, tested that from hs examnaton of Puno, he
gathered that Puno acted wth dscernment when he commtted the kng and that Puno coud dstngush between rght
and wrong (5 tsn |anuary 1 1, 197 1). Doctor Vcente aso concuded that Puno was not suherng from any deuson and
that he was not mentay decent; otherwse, he woud not have reached thrd year hgh schoo (8-19 tsn |anuary 1 1, 197
1).
On December 14, 1970 or three months after the commsson of the ohense, Doctors Vcente, Robes and Vctorna V.
Mankan of the Natona Menta Hospta submtted the foowng report on Puno (Exh. B or 2):
Records show that he had undergone psychatrc treatment at the Out-Patent Servce of the Natona Menta Hospta for
schzophrena n 1962 from whch he recovered; n 1964 a reapse of the same menta ness when he mproved and n
1966 when hs ness remaned unmproved.
Hs treatment was contnued at the |RR Memora Hospta at the San Lazaro Compound up to |uy, 1970. He was reeved
of symptoms and dd not come back anymore for medcaton. On September 8, 1970, accordng to nformaton, he was
abe to k an od woman. Partcuars of the ohense are not gven.
MENTAL CONDITION
... Presenty, he s quet and as usua manageabe. He s fary cean n person and wthout undue dspay of emoton. He
taks to co-patents but becomes evasve when takng wth the doctor and other personne of the ward. He knows he s
accused of murder but refuses to eaborate on t.
xxx xxx xxx
REMARKS
In vew of the foregong ndngs, Ernesto Puno, who prevousy was suherng from a menta ness caed schzophrena, is
presently free from any social incapacitatin, psychotic symptoms.
The seemng gnorance of very smpe known facts and amnesa of severa soated accounts n hs fe do not t the actve
pattern of a schzophrenc process. It may be found n an acutey dsturbed and confused patent or a markedy, retarded
ndvdua of whch he s not.
8
However, persons who recover from an acute epsode of menta ness ke schzophrena may retan some resdua
symptoms mparng ther |udgment but not necessarily their discernment of ri,ht from wron, of the o3ense committed.
The foregong report was submtted pusuant to Rue 28 of the Rues of Court and the order of the tra court dated
November 16, 1970 for the menta examnaton of Puno n the Natona Menta Hospta to determne whether he coud
stand tra and whether he was sane when he commtted the kng.
The tra court concuded that Puno was sane or knew that the kng of Francsca Co was wrong and that he woud be
punshed for t, as shown by the threats whch he made to Hara de a Cruz and Lna Pa|es, the od woman's companons
who wtnessed hs dastardy deed.
The tra court aso concuded that f Puno was a homcda manac who had gone berserk, he woud have ked aso Hara
and Lna. The fact that he snged out Ang Kkay sgned that he reay dsposed of her because he thought that she was
a wtch.
|udge Onofre A. Vauz sad that durng the tra he "metcuousy observed the conduct and behavor of the accused nsde
the court, most especay when he was presented on the wtness stand" and he was convnced "that the accused s sane
and has fu grasp of what was happenng" n hs envronment.
The tra court convcted Puno of murder, sentenced hm to death and ordered hm to pay the hers of the vctm an
ndemnty of twenty-two thousand pesos (Crmna Case No. 509).
Hs counse de oco n ths revew of the death sentence, contends that the tra court erred n not sustanng the defense
of nsanty and n apprecatng evdent premedtaton, abuse of superorty and dsregard of sex as aggravatng
crcumstances.
When nsanty s aeged as a ground for exempton from responsbty, the evdence on ths pont must refer to the tme
precedng the act under prosecuton or to the very moment of ts executon (U.S. vs. Guevara, 27 Ph. 547). Insanty
shoud be proven by cear and postve evdence (Peope vs. Bascos, 44 Ph. 204).
The defense contends that Puno was nsane when he ked Francsca Co because he had chronc schzophrena snce
1962; he was suherng from schzophrena on September 8, 1970, when he qudated the vctm, and schzophrena s a
form of psychoss whch deprves a person of dscernment and freedom of w.
Insanty under artce 12 of the Revsed Pena Code means that the accused must be deprved competey of reason or
dscernment and freedom of the w at the tme of commttng the crme (Peope vs- Formgones, 87 Ph. 658, 660).
Insanty exsts when there s complete deprvaton of ntegence n commttng the act, that s, the accused s deprved of
reason, he acts wthout the east dscernment because there s compete absence of the power to dscern, or that there
s total deprivation of freedom of the will. Mere abnormaty of the menta facutes w not excude mputabty." (Peope
vs. Amba, G.R. No. 52688, October 17, 1980; Peope vs. Renegade, L-27031, May 31, 1974, 57 SCRA 275, 286; Peope vs.
Cruz, 109 Ph. 288, 292. As to "e trastorno menta transtoro as an exemptng crcumstance, see I Cueo Caon, Codgo
Pena, 15th Ed., 1974. pp. 498-504 and art. 8 of the Spansh Pena Code.)
After evauatng counse de ofcio4s contentons n the ght of the strct rue |ust stated and the crcumstances surroundng
the kng, we are ed to the concuson that Puno was not egay nsane when he ked the hapess and hepess vctm.
The facts and the ndngs of the psychatrsts revea that on that tragc occason he was not competey deprved of reason
and freedom of w.
In People vs. Fausto y 5omas, 113 Ph. 841, the accused was conned n the Natona Menta Hospta for thrteen days
because he was suherng from schzophrena of the paranod type. Hs connement was recommended by Doctor Antono
Casa of the San Mgue Brewery where the accused used to work as a aborer. About one year and two months ater, he
ked Doctor Casa because the atter refused to certfy hm for re-empoyment. Hs pea of nsanty was re|ected. He was
convcted of murder.
In the nstant case, the tra court correcty characterzed the kng as murder. The quafyng crcumstance s abuse of
superorty. In qudatng Francsco Co, Puno, who was armed wth a hammer, took advantage of hs superor natura
strength over that of the unarmed septuagenaran femae vctm who was unabe to oher any resstance and who coud do
nothng but excam " Dyos ko ".
Thus, t was hed that "an attack made by a man wth a deady weapon upon an unarmed and defenseess woman
consttutes the crcumstance of abuse of that superorty whch qqqs sex and the weapon used n the act ahorded hm, and
from whch the woman was unabe to defend hersef" (Peope vs. Guzman, 107 Ph. 1122, 1127 ctng U.S. vs. Consueo,
13 Ph. 612; U.S. vs. Camoy 36 Ph. 757 and Peope vs. Ouesada, 62 Ph. 446).
Evdent premedtaton (premeditacion conocida) cannot be apprecated because the evdence does not show (a) the tme
when the ohender determned to commt the crme, (b) an act manfesty ndcatng that the cuprt had cung to hs
determnaton and (c) a sumcent nterva of tme between the determnaton and the executon of the crme to aow hm
to reect upon the consequences of hs act (Peope vs. Abates, L-33304, |uy 31, 1974, 58 SCRA 241, 247).
The essence of premedtaton "es a mayor perversdad de cupabe |untamente con su serendad o fradad de anmo." It
s characterzed (1) "por a concepcon de deto y a resoucon de e|ecutaro rme, fra, reexva medtada y detenda"
9
and (2) "por a persstenca en a resoucon de denqur demostrada por e espaco de tempo transcurrdo entre dcha
resoucon y a e|ecucon de hecho Premedtaton shoud be evdent, meanng that t shoud be shown by "sgnos
reterados v externos, no de meras sospechas" (1 Cueo Caon, Codgo Pena, 1974 or 15th Ed., pp- 582-3).
Dweng and dsregard of the respect due to the vctm on account of her od age shoud be apprecated as generc
aggravatng crcumstances. Dsregard of sex s not aggravatng because there s no evdence that the accused deberatey
ntended to ohend or nsut the sex of the vctm or showed manfest dsrespect to her womanhood (Peope vs. Mangsant,
65 Ph. 548; Peope vs. Mor, L-23511-2, |anuary 31, 1974, 55 SCRA 382, 404, Peope vs, |aua, 90 Ph. 379; U.S. vs. De
|esus, 14 Ph. 190).
However, those two aggravatng crcumstances are oh-set by the mtgatng crcumstances of vountary surrender to the
authortes and, as contended by counse de ofcio, the ohender's menta ness (md psychoss or schzophrenc reacton)
whch dmnshed hs w-power wthout however deprvng hm of conscousness of hs acts. (See Peope vs. Francsco, 78
Ph. 694, Peope vs. Amt, 82 Ph. 820 and Peope vs. Formgones, 87 Ph. 658.)
Thus, t was hed that a equvocada creenca de os acusados de que e matar a un bru|o es un ben a pubco puede
consderarse como una crcunstanca atenuante pues os que tenen a obsesson de que os bru|os deben ser emnados
estan en a msma condcon que aque que, atacado de enfermedad morbosa pero conscente aun de o que hace, no
tene verdadero mpero de su vountad" (Peope vs. Baneg 79 Ph. 805, 810).
It resuts that the medum perod of the penaty for murder shoud be mposed (Arts. 64|41 and 248, Revsed Pena Code).
WHEREFORE, the death penaty s set asde. The accused s sentenced to reclusion perpetua The ndemnty mposed by
the tra court s amrmed. Costs de ofcio.
SO ORDERED.
10