Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • People V Banez

    Uploaded by

    Marie Cachola
    6 views1 page
    The accused-appellant was charged with parricide for killing his father. He claimed the defense of insanity due to schizophrenia. A psychiatrist testified that the accused had schizophrenia but was unsure if he was insane at the time of the killing. The accused's mother testified he had a history of mental illness. The trial court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to death. On appeal, the court held that the accused failed to prove he was completely deprived of reason during the killing. The court affirmed his conviction but modified his sentence to reclusion perpetua.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    People v Banez

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The accused-appellant was charged with parricide for killing his father. He claimed the defense of insanity due to schizophrenia. A psychiatrist testified that the accused had schizophrenia but was unsure if he was insane at the time of the killing. The accused's mother testified he had a history of mental illness. The trial court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to death. On appeal, the court held that the accused failed to prove he was completely deprived of reason during the killing. The court affirmed his conviction but modified his sentence to reclusion perpetua.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    6 views1 page

    People V Banez

    Uploaded by

    Marie Cachola
    The accused-appellant was charged with parricide for killing his father. He claimed the defense of insanity due to schizophrenia. A psychiatrist testified that the accused had schizophrenia but was unsure if he was insane at the time of the killing. The accused's mother testified he had a history of mental illness. The trial court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to death. On appeal, the court held that the accused failed to prove he was completely deprived of reason during the killing. The court affirmed his conviction but modified his sentence to reclusion perpetua.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    People v.

    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.

    You might also like