People v Salufrania

FACTS:
 Filomeno Salufrania was charged with the complex crime of parricide with intentional abortion.
Information alleged the following:
o Parricide: The victim was his wife, Marciana Abuyo-Salufrania, whom he strangled and
boxed causing upon her injuries, which resulted in her instantaneous death.
o Intentional Abortion: Marciana was at the time 8 months pregnant. Filomeno’s violence
caused the death of the child while still in its maternal womb
o Penalty: DEATH, indemnify heirs in sum of P12,000.00 and a compensation of P500.00
 Prosecution presented three witnesses: Dr. Dyquiangco, Pedro Salufrania and Narciso Abuyo
o Dr. Dyquiangco: cause of death was cardiac arrest, as indicated on death certificate issued
only after the post mortem examination on 11 December 1974
o Pedro Salufrania: son of appellant and of deceased who, before testifying, was mas carefully
examined to assess whether he was already capable of receiving correct impressions of facts
and of relating them truly. (he was found to be capable). He testified that his parents
quarreled and he saw his father box his mother on the stomach, and once fallen on the floor,
his father strangled her to death; that he saw blood ooze from the eys and nose of his mother
and that she died right on the spot where she fell. Pedro also saw his father carrying his
mother on his shoulder and bning the cadaver to the house of his sister Conching. Finally,
pedro testified that his father threatened to kil him and his other siblings should he reveal the
true cause of his mother’s death
o Narciso Abuyo: (brother of Marciana) testified that Filomeno and Marciana were lawfully
wedded. That he first came to know about his sister’s death on 4 December 1974 thru his
nephews pedro and alex who informed him that their mother died of stomach ailment and
headache.
 Filomeno Safrania: admitted that he was the lawful husband of Marciana. He said he was awakened
by his wife who was still complaining of stomach pain and despite administering native treatments
known as “hilot” and “bantil”, her condition worsened. He allegedly even asked Juanito Bragais to
help cure his wife, but the latter wasn’t able to do so. When his wife was already dead he ordered his
children to get the hammock of Kaloy Belardo. He also challenged Pedor’s competence as a witness
because Pedro was only 11 years old whn the offense charged occurred.

ISSUES and RULING:

 WON Filomeno was correctly charged with the complex crime of parricide with intentional abortion
o The Supreme Court ruled that despite knowledge of the accused of his wife’s pregnancy, the
intent to cause the abortion has not been sufficiently established, thus, the accused is only
liable for the complex crime of parricide (for the death of wife) with unintentional abortion
(for the death of the fetus in the mother’s womb).
 Elements of Unintentional Abortion:
 That there is a pregnant woman
 That violence is used upon such pregnant woman without intending an
abortion
 That the violence is intentionally exerted
 That as a result of the violence the foetus dies, either in the womb or after
having been expelled therefrom.
o The Court did not sustain the crime of intentional abortion because mere boxing on the
stomach taken together with the immediate strangling of the victim in a fight is not sufficient
proof to show an intent to cause an abortion.
Decision:
 Using Article 48 of the RPC, the penalty corresponding to the more serious crime of parricide, to be
imposed in its maximum period which is death. However, because of the 1987 Constitution, which
has abolished the death penalty, appellant should be sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua.
 Indemnity of P12,000 awarded to the heirs of the deceased is increased to P30,000.