Case Digest (G.R. No. 214444) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
On March 20, 2005, at around 7:30 a.m., in Barangay Masaya, Rosario, Batangas, Lito Paaa y Inandan attacked and fatally hacked his cousin Sherwin Macatangay y Lara with a two-foot bolo. The victim was found dead on his bed, having sustained multiple incised wounds on the head and neck. A neighbor, Aldwin Andal, witnessed the killing and reported it to authorities. Police officers later found the accused 25 to 30 meters from the scene, lying with the bolo in hand; he attempted to flee but was apprehended. At trial, the Regional Trial Court (Branch 87, Rosario, Batangas) convicted Paaa of murder for treachery and premeditation and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay ₱50,000 death indemnity. The Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 05483, affirmed in toto. Paaa appealed to the Supreme Court, invoking the defense of insanity, supported only by his and his mother’s lay testimonies regarding past depressive episodes and unusual behavior, without any expert psych... Case Digest (G.R. No. 214444) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Criminal incident
- On March 20, 2005 at around 7:30 a.m. in Barangay Masaya, Rosario, Batangas, Lito PaAa y Inandan (PaAa) armed with a bolo attacked and hacked his sleeping cousin, Sherwin Macatangay y Lara, inflicting fatal incised wounds on the head and neck.
- Witness Aldwin Andal fled and reported the incident; police found PaAa 25–30 meters away, lying on the ground with the bolo, attempted flight, and was apprehended.
- Trial and defense
- The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted PaAa of murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering ₱50,000 death indemnity to the heirs.
- PaAa interposed the defense of insanity, testifying he suffered depression, sleepless nights, and attempted suicide since 2003; his mother corroborated unusual behavior and blank stares, but they presented no medical expert.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, holding PaAa failed to prove complete deprivation of intelligence at the time of the crime and that lay testimony alone was insufficient. PaAa appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether PaAa’s defense of insanity exempts him from criminal liability for murder under Article 12(1) of the Revised Penal Code.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)