Title
People vs. Formigones
Case
G.R. No. L-3246
Decision Date
Nov 29, 1950
Abelardo Formigones, driven by jealousy, stabbed his wife Julia, leading to her death. Despite claims of feeble-mindedness, the court ruled him guilty of parricide, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, with mitigating factors considered.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 172035)

Petitioner

The People of the Philippines

Respondent

Abelardo Formigones

Key Dates

  • October–December 1946: Residence at Zacarias’s house; December 28, 1946: Killing occurred
  • November 29, 1950: Decision rendered

Applicable Law and Constitution

  • Constitution: 1935 Philippine Constitution (decision pre-1990)
  • Penal Statutes: Articles 246 (parricide), 12 (insanity/imbecility), 13 (mitigating circumstances), 63 and 64 (application of penalties) of the Revised Penal Code

Facts of the Crime

Late afternoon, December 28, 1946, Julia Agricola sat on the stair head of the house she shared with her husband in Sipocot. Without warning or provocation, Abelardo took a bolo and stabbed her in the back. The blade penetrated her right lung, causing fatal hemorrhage. Julia fell down the stairs; Abelardo carried her back upstairs, laid her on the living-room floor, and remained beside her. He made no attempt to flee.

Investigation and Pleas

Constabulary investigators secured a signed confession (Exhibit D) in which Abelardo admitted the killing, attributing his act to jealousy over suspected illicit relations between his wife and Zacarias. In the preliminary inquiry, he pleaded guilty; at trial he pleaded not guilty but offered no testimony.

Insanity Defense and Evidence

Defense introduced two jail guards’ testimony describing Abelardo’s eccentric or bizarre conduct in confinement (undressing, singing, escape attempt) and a medical opinion by Dr. Francisco Gomez diagnosing him as feeble-minded, not imbecile.

Legal Standard on Imbecility (Article 12)

Exemption for imbecility requires total impairment of reason or free will at the crime’s commission. Mere feeble-mindedness or eccentricity does not absolve criminal liability. Precedents from Spain and Philippine jurisprudence demand clear proof of complete mental incapacity at the moment of the act.

Court’s Analysis of Mental Capacity

The trial court found—and this Court agreed—that Abelardo was not deprived entirely of discernment. His long history of farm work, dutiful family support, raising and schooling five children, and the ability to harbor jealousy and vindicate his honor by killing his wife demonstrated sufficient capacity to distinguish right from wrong.

Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances

  • Aggravating: None proved (treachery not alleged nor established).
  • Mitigating:
    • Paragraph 6, Article 13: Act committed under an impulse so powerful as to naturally produce passion or obfuscation (jealous fit).
    • Paragraphs 8/9, Article 13: Feeble-mindedness as a physical/mental defect limiting willpower and action.

Application of Penalty Provisions

Parricide carries the penalty of recl

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.