People V. Manolito Oyanib, G.R. No.

130634-35, March 12, 2001

FACTS:

Joint trial of two cases filed against Oyanib: (1) Crim Case No. 6012, for the killing of
Jesus Esquierdo; (2) Crim Case No. 6018, for the killing of Tita Oyanib, wife of accused.
Manolito and Tita were married in 1979; 2 children; living in Iligan City.
They separated de facto in 1994 due to marital differences, with Manolito keeping
custody of their children; Tita lived nearby, renting a room at the second floor of Edgardo
Lladas house.
Manolito exerted efforts towards reconciliation for the sake of their children, but to no
avail. Tita was very reluctant to reconcile but instead, she was open about her relationship
with other mean and would flaunt it in front of Manolito.
One instance, Manolito chanced upon Tita and Jesus in a very intimate situation by a
hanging bridge. He confronted them and reminded Tita that she was still his wife. They
ignored him and threatened to kill him.
On September 4, 1995, Manolito went to the house where Tita was staying to inform the
latter of the meeting at the school re: the failing grades of their child. Upon reaching the
house, he heard kissing sounds. He opened the door using a hunting knife and caught Tita
and Jesus having sexual intercourse, Jesus on top of Tita, with his pants on his knees.
Jesus kicked Manolito in the cheek but the latter immediately stabbed the former.
Lladas, upon hearing a commotion on the second floor of his house, went to check and
found Manolito stabbing Jesus while sitting on the latters stomach. Tita was sprawled on
the floor with her duster smeared with blood; she died on the way to the hospital.
Jesus and Tita died of multiple stab wounds.
Accused surrendered and admitted killing his wife and her paramour but invoked the
exceptional circumstances under Article 247, RPC.
RTC: convicted him of Homicide and Parricide; with 2 mitigating circumstances:
passion/obfuscation and voluntary surrender.

ISSUE: Whether or not accused is entitled to the exceptional privilege under Article 247.
RULING:
Yes. Accused invoked Art. 247 of the RPC as an absolutory and an exempting cause. An
absolutory cause is present where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public policy
and sentiment there is no penalty imposed.
Art. 247 prescribes the following essential elements for such a defense, which must be
proved by the accused by clear and convincing evidence:
(1) That a legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person;
(2) That he kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter; and

(3) That he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife (or daughter) or that
he/she has not consented to the infidelity of the other spouse.
The death caused must be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused
after chancing upon his spouse in the act of infidelity. Simply, the killing by the husband of his
wife must concur with her flagrant adultery.
Elements:
(1) Present
(2) Present accused surprised his wife and her lover in the act of sexual intercourse. He
was blinded by jealousy and outrage. He vented his anger on his wife when she
reacted, not in defense of him, but in support of Jesus, her paramour.
The vindication of a mans honor is justified because of the scandal an unfaithful wife
creates; the law is strict on this, authorizing as it does, a man to chastise her, even
with death. But killing the errant spouse as a purification is so severe as that it can
only be justified when the unfaithful spouse is caught in flragrante delicto; and it
must be resorted to only with great caution so much so that the law requires that it be
inflicted only during the sexual intercourse or immediately thereafter. [People v.
Wagas, 171 SCRA 69, 73 [1989]]