[Criminal Law 2]

2nd semester, A.Y.

2014-2015

People v Mercado
No. L-65152
Ponente: J. Relova
Date: August 30, 1984
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Federico Mercado or Alberto Mercado
Relief: Appeal from the decision of CFI of Rizal
FACTS:

Mercado was the boyfriend of Susan Baylon, the younger sister of complainant
Yvonne Baylon. Susan left the family residence on Sept 1, 1979 and Mercado
suspected that its was Yvonne who instigated her to leave.
At about 8:30am the next day, Mercado came from behind Yvonne while she was walking on a road at San Carlos Subd, Binagonan, Rizal.
Mercado grabbed Yvonne by the neck and pointed a knife on her throat, then dragged her to the house of his friend
Norma Guerrero. Mercado demanded that Yvonne produce her sister Susan. He then dragged her to the road side.
The brothers of Yvonne and some neighbors arrived asking Mercado to release
Yvonne, but instead of doing so, Mercado raised the blouse of Yvonne and inserted
his hand underneath it and pointed the knife on her breast. Thereafter, Mercado dragged Yvonne to a store where the Chief of Police and
some policemen talked to him.
Mercado demanded from the police that he wanted to see Susan and that he be given transportation and money. This situation lasted up to
about 12nn.
The barrio captain arrives and he was able to take hold of Mercado and subdue him.
Yvonne, because of the traumatic experience she was subjected to, lost
consciousness and was brought to the hospital. Her fingers suffered injuries, abrasion on her neck, and a small wound on her stomach.
On the other hand, Mercado averred that Susan was his wife; that although they were not legally marries, they had been living together for
some time in their family house in Tayuman. He also alleged that it was Yvonne who first attempted to stab him, only he was able to stop her
and grab the knife from her, and that was when the barrio captain and the policemen arrived who thought that he was going to stab Yvonne.

ISSUE1: WON the lower court erred in not ruling that Mercados guilt has not been proven NO
HELD/RATIO1:
The issue revolves around the credibility of the witnesses. Well settled is the rule that unless there is a showing that the trial court overlooked,
misunderstood, or misapplied some fact or circumstance of weight and substance that would have affected the result of the case, the appellate court will
not disturb the factual findings of the lower court. For having had the opportunity of observing the demeanor and behavior of the witnesses while
testifying, the trial court, more than the reviewing tribunal, is in a better position to gauge their credibility, and properly appreciate the relative weight of
the often conflicting evidence for both parties.
ISSUE2: WON Mercado should be convicted of kidnapping and serious illegal detention YES
HELD/RATIO2:
While the defense argued that Mercado should be convicted of grave coercion only sicne his purpose was to force Yvonne to produce Susan, the Court
believes this was without merit. Following the Ablaza case, the victim was actually restrained or deprived of her freedom, and that makes proper the
prosecution of the accused under Art 267 of the RPC (illegal detention).
ISSUE3: WON Mercado should be credited with mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation NO
HELD/RATIO3:
Said mitigating circumstance cannot be invoked in favor of the accused whose relationship with her was illegitimate. The obfuscation must arise from
lawful sentiments.
ISSUE4: WON Mercado should be credited with the period of his preventive detention YES
HELD/RATIO4:
He has been detained since Sept 2, 1979 and therefore, in accordance with Art 29 of the RPC, the period of his preventive detention should be deducted
from the term of his sentence (reclusion perpetua).
Batac, Endaya, Lingat, Santos, Saturnino, Villafuerte, Yee

[Criminal Law 2]
2nd semester, A.Y.
2014-2015

DISPOSITIVE:
Wherefore, the decision appealed from is affirmed, with costs. Appellant should be credited with the full time of his preventive imprisonment upon a
showing that he agreed to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, otherwise, he shall be credited with 4/5 of the time of
such preventive imprisonment.
NOTES:
Elements of the crime of illegal detention (Art 267, RPC):
1) that the offender is a private individual
2) that he kidnaps or detains another, or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty
3) that the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal
4) in the commission of the offense, any of the ff circumstances is present
a) that the kidnapping or detention last for more than 5 days
b) that it is committed simulating public authority
c) that any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or
threats to kill him are made
d) that the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer
Illegal detention is committed by a private person while arbitrary detention (Art 124, RPC) is committed by a public officer, usually a law-enforcing
authority. There is illegal detention in forcible abduction. When the violent taking of a woman is motivated by lewd designs, forcible abduction under Art
342 is the offense (against chastity); when it is not so motivated, the offense is kidnapping under Art 267 (against personal liberty).

Batac, Endaya, Lingat, Santos, Saturnino, Villafuerte, Yee