People V Banez
People V Banez
Banez
FACTS: Accused-appellant was charged with Parricide for killing his father.
He interposed the defense of insanity. To prove his claim of insanity, the
accused-appellant presented as witnesses: the psychiatrist who examined
him after the incident and his mother. The doctor testified that the accused-
appellant is suffering from schizophrenia which is a mental disorder
characterized by thought disturbances, hallucination, suspiciousness and
deterioration in areas of work, social relations and self care. Accused-
appellant admitted to the killing and he is remorseful. But he is not sure if
at the time of the commission of the crime if accused appellant was insane.
While the mother, testified that long before the incident, accused-appellant
was confined for more than year at the Bicutan Rehabilitation for gasoline
addiction and after killing his father, the accused-appellant was confined at
the Mandaluyong Mental Hospital.
Trial Court found the accused-appellant guilty of parricide with aggravating
circumstances of dwelling and habitual intoxication and sentenced to suffer
penalty of death.
Hence this appeal.
ISSUE: WHETHER THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO THE
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE OF INSANITY
HELD: The accused-appellant is not entitled to the exempting circumstance
of insanity.
To be entitled to this exempting circumstance of insanity, it is necessary
that there is complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act; that
there be no responsibility for his own acts; that he acts without the least
discernment.
Here, the accused-appellant, failed to prove that he was completely
deprived of reason when he killed his father. There is nothing in the report
of the doctor or in his testimony which shows that the accused appellant
was completely deprived of reason on that fateful night.
The decision of the Regional Trial Court is affirmed with modification that
the accused -appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua.