Title
People vs. Sabalberino y Abulencia
Case
G.R. No. 241088
Decision Date
Jun 3, 2019
William Sabalberino convicted of parricide for stabbing his wife, Delia, during an argument; claims of accidental stabbing and infidelity rejected by courts.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 80728)

Procedural History and Applicable Law

On August 19, 2005, the City Prosecutor of Tacloban filed an Information charging William with parricide for stabbing and killing his wife on August 17, 2005. William pleaded not guilty upon arraignment on March 21, 2006. The case was tried before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Tacloban City, which convicted him on February 24, 2016 of parricide, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay damages. The Court of Appeals (CA), in its decision dated May 31, 2017, affirmed the conviction with modifications on damages, and denied reconsideration on January 29, 2018. William appealed to the Supreme Court.

Facts Established During Trial

The victim and accused were married with five children and lived together in Tacloban City. On the night of August 17, 2005, their two daughters, Angela and Jessica, overheard loud arguing between their parents. The father punched the mother, who was holding the daughters, and then went to the kitchen, retrieved a knife, and stabbed her in the chest below the armpit. The mother attempted to leave the house but collapsed and died soon afterward. William admitted stabbing Delia but claimed the stabbing was accidental during a confrontation with another man allegedly caught in the act with his wife.

Issue Presented

The Court had to determine whether the CA correctly upheld William’s conviction for parricide, specifically examining the validity of William’s defense that the stabbing was accidental and whether mitigating circumstances applied.

Elements of Parricide and Proof

Parricide requires proof that (1) a person was killed, (2) the accused caused the death, and (3) the deceased was the accused’s legitimate spouse, parent, child, ascendant, or descendant. The victim’s death was established by her Death Certificate citing fatal stab wounds to the chest. The accused admitted to stabbing her, and the daughters provided eyewitness accounts consistent with this fact.

Credibility of Witnesses and Relationship of Parties

The daughters’ testimonies were found credible and showed no presence of any other person in the house during the incident. Their accounts contradicted William’s claim that he found his wife with another man. The mutual spousal relationship was uncontroverted, evidenced by the admission of the accused and the marriage certificate presented by the prosecution.

Defense Under Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code

William invoked Article 247, which mitigates penalty to “destierro” if a legally married person kills the spouse or the paramour upon surprising them in the act of sexual intercourse or immediately thereafter, provided there was no prior facilitation or consent to infidelity. The Supreme Court found William failed to prove this defense by clear and convincing evidence. The credible testimonies negated the presence of a paramour or infidelity at the time.

Assessment of Mitigating Circumstances

William argued passion and obfuscation, lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong, and voluntary surrender as mitigating circumstances. The Court rejected passion and obfuscation because the quarrel preceding the stabbing did not rise to the level of uncontrollable passion that would justify such mitigation.
Voluntary surrender was denied because there was no proof of spontaneity or unconditional intent to submit to authorities; mere compliance during police questioning does not amount to voluntary surrend

...continue reading

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