Title
People vs. GeNo.
Case
G.R. No. 135981
Decision Date
Jan 15, 2004
Marivic Genosa, a battered woman, killed her abusive husband in self-defense. The Supreme Court recognized Battered Woman Syndrome as mitigating, reducing her parricide penalty, allowing parole.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 135981)

Charge and RTC Decision

Marivic Genosa was charged with parricide under Article 246 of the RPC for killing her husband with treachery. The RTC convicted her, found no mitigating circumstances, applied treachery as an aggravating circumstance and imposed the death penalty, plus civil indemnity and moral damages.

Prosecution’s Version of Facts

Appellant and victim married in 1983 and lived in Leyte. The victim disappeared after a cockfight on November 15, 1995. Neighbors later reported a foul odor; police found Ben’s decomposing body in the bedroom, wearing only briefs, with a depressed occipital fracture. A two-meter metal pipe stained with blood was found nearby. Post-mortem revealed severe intracranial hemorrhage from a depressed skull fracture.

Defense’s Version of Facts

Appellant admitted killing her husband but claimed self-defense and introduced the battered woman syndrome (BWS). She narrated repeated violent episodes—slappings, choke-holds, threats with a bolo or cutter—occurring some three times a week over more than a decade. On the fatal night, the victim returned home drunk, assaulted her with a chopping knife and bolo, dragged her toward a gun-filled drawer while threatening to kill her, and battered her despite her eight-month pregnancy. Fearing for her and her child’s life, she retrieved the hidden firearm and shot him.

Remand for Expert Psychological Evidence

On appeal, appellant moved for psychological and psychiatric evaluations. The Supreme Court partially granted the motion, remanding for expert testimony on BWS. Clinical psychologist Dr. Natividad Dayan and psychiatrist Dr. Alfredo Pajarillo testified on the cyclical nature of spousal abuse, its psychological effects (post-traumatic stress, learned helplessness, heightened fear), and how repetitive, severe beatings diminish an abused person’s will-power and induce overwhelming fear.

Issues on Appeal

  1. Whether self-defense (and defense of her fetus) was valid under the battered woman syndrome.
  2. Whether treachery attended the killing.
    (Collateral factual assignments regarding credibility, marriage proof, cause of death, character evidence, children’s testimony, flight, and guilt indicia were also raised but found unmeritorious or peripheral.)

Self-Defense and Battered Woman Syndrome

Under Article 11(1)(1) RPC, self-defense requires (a) unlawful aggression, (b) reasonable necessity of means, and (c) lack of sufficient provocation. Although foreign courts recognize BWS as a form of (complete or imperfect) self-defense, Philippine jurisprudence still demands actual or imminent unlawful aggression at the moment of the fatal act. The Court found that when appellant shot her husband he was no longer actively attacking her; he had ceased aggression and retreated. Thus, the legal requisite of continuing unlawful aggression was not met, and complete exoneration by self-defense was unavailable.

Mitigating Circumstances

While self-defense failed in full, the Court recognized two mitigating circumstances under Article 13 of the RPC:
• Illness diminishing will-power (Art. 13(9)): Appellant’s BWS constituted a psychological paralysis that impaired her self-control without negating consciousness of her act.
• Passion and obfuscation (Art. 13(10)): The victim’s renewed acute aggression—threats with a bolo, dragging her by the neck, and hazards to her eight-month pregnancy—naturally produced an uncontrollable burst of passion and mental confusion.

Treachery

Treachery

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.