C.A. No.

384 February 21, 1946

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
NICOLAS JAURIGUE and AVELINA JAURIGUE, defendants.
AVELINA JAURIGUE, appellant.

DE JOYA, J.:

FACTS:

Avelina Jaurigue was prosecuted in the Court of First Instance of Tayabas, for the crime of murder, of which defendant
was found guilty of homicide and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty ranging from seven years, four months and one day
of prision mayor to thirteen years, nine months and eleven days of reclusion temporal.

Defendant Avelina stabbed the victim Amado Capina due to the latter’s previous mischievous and inappropriate sexual
advances towards the former. The stabbing incident happened inside the barrio church during a novena being celebrated at
that time. Immediately after the incident, the defendant surrendered the knife used in the stabbing and followed the
instructions of the barrio lieutenant to secure themselves in their home until called upon by authorities.

Appellant appealed the lower court’s decision arguing that:

1. appellant had acted in the legitimate defense of her honor;

2. existence of mitigating circumstances that (a) she did not have the intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
actually committed, and that (b) she voluntarily surrendered to the agents of the authorities;
3. absence of aggravating circumstance based on the holding that the offense was committed in a sacred place.

ISSUE:

1. WON the mitigating circumstances raised should be considered in defendant’s favor. (YES)
2. WON there is an aggravating circumstance in the committed offense. (NO)

RULING:

1. The defendant immediately and voluntarily and unconditionally surrendered after the incident. Defendant acted in
the immediate vindication of a grave offense committed against her a few moments before, and upon such
provocation as to produce passion and obfuscation, or temporary loss of reason and self-control. Defendant had not
intended to kill the deceased but merely wanted to punish his offending hand with her knife, as shown by the fact
that she inflicted upon him only one single wound;
2. The aggravating circumstance that the killing was done in a place dedicated to religious worship, cannot be legally
sustained as there is no evidence to show that the defendant had murder in her heart when she entered the chapel
that fatal night. Further, defendant only committed the alleged offense under the greatest provocation.

From the foregoing, the Court ruled that the defendant committed the crime of homicide, with no aggravating
circumstance whatsoever, but with at least three mitigating circumstances of a qualified character to be considered in her
favor; and, in accordance with the provisions of article 69 of the Revised Penal Code, defendant is entitled to a reduction by
one or two degrees in the penalty to be imposed upon her. And considering the circumstances of the instant case, the
defendant should be accorded the most liberal consideration possible under the law.