TOPIC: Elements of Criminal Liability_Essential elements_General and specific intent
VIRGINIA JABALDE y JAMANDRON, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE
CASE TITLE:
PHILIPPINES, respondent
DATE: JUN 15, 2016 G.R. NO: 195224 PONENTE: REYES, J.
DOCTRINE
Only when the laying of hands is shown beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the accused to
debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being should it be
punished as child abuse (or under RA No. 7610), otherwise, it is punished under the RPC.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Before the Court is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.
Date Facts
● At around 9:00 a.m. of December 13, 2000, Lin Bito-on was
playing "langit lupa" during recess with Ray Ann, Marco, Nova
(Jabalde’s daugther) and another classmate.
● During the course of their game, Lin touched the shoulder of Nova
causing the latter to fall down and wounding her head. He then
helped Nova to stand while one of his classmates called Jabalde.
● Afraid of what happened, Lin ran towards a dilapidated building,
which was near the place of the incident.
● Soon thereafter, Jabalde arrived and slapped him on his neck and
choked him. Lin was able to get out of her hold when he removed
her hands from his neck.
● Lin immediately ran towards their house some 500 meters away
December 13, 2000 from the school.
● He told his mother, Aileen, about the incident. Thereafter, he was
brought to Sta. Catalina Hospital for treatment and a medical
certificate was then issued to him.
● Dr. Muñoz testified that she was the physician who issued the
medical certificate to Lin for the physical examination conducted
upon the latter. Dr. Muñoz stated that Lin sustained abrasions
○ According to her, the abrasions could have been caused by
a hard object but mildly inflicted and that these linear
abrasions were signs of fingernail marks. Moreover, the
abrasions were greenish in color signifying that they were
still fresh. She did not notice other injuries on the body of
Lin except those on his neck
● Jabalde pleaded "not guilty" in a criminal information for violation of
October 14, 2002 Section 10 (a), Article VI, of R.A. No. 7610, before the RTC of
Dumaguete City, Branch 31.
● In its Judgment, the RTC found Jabalde guilty beyond reasonable
doubt for violation of Section 10 (a), Article VI, of R.A. No. 7610.
○ WHEREFORE, the prosecution having proved the guilt of
[Jabalde] beyond reasonable doubt of violation of
paragraph (a), Section 10, Article VI of R.A. 7610, as
amended, [Jabalde] is Convicted. Appreciating in her favor
the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation,
and applying the provisions of the indeterminate sentence
law [Jabalde] is hereby sentenced to an indeterminate
penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) months and
May 31, 2006 one (1) day of prision correccional in its minimum period, as
minimum to six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor
in its minimum period, as maximum.
The bond posted for her temporary liberty is hereby ordered
release.
SO ORDERED.
● Naturally dissatisfied with the trial court's decision, Jabalde
appealed to the CA.
● The CA dismissed Jabalde's appeal and affirmed the RTC decision
with modification.
○ WHEREFORE,the 31 May 2006 Decision, of the
[RTC],Branch 63, Bayawan City, Negros Oriental, is
AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that [Jabalde] is hereby
sentenced to suffer the penalty of four (4) years, nine (9)
August 12, 2010 months and eleven (11) days of prision correccional, as
minimum, to six (6) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day
of prision mayor, as maximum.
SO ORDERED.
● Jabalde filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied by the
January 4, 2011 CA.
ISSUES AND HELD
1. W/O acts complained of are covered by the Revised Penal Code (RPC) or R.A. No. 7610.
● Petitioner’s Argument:
○ The petitioner argues that in her case, the act of inflicting injuries, however minute they
were, is punishable under the RPC particularly Article 266 (1) which defines slight physical
injuries; hence, she should be punished under the RPC and not under Section 10 (a), Article
VI of R.A. No. 7610
● Supreme Court:
○ The acts complained of are covered by the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
○ On the substantive issue of the applicability of R.A. No. 7610 in the case at bar, the Court
agrees with the contention of Jabalde in her Reply to OSG's Comment that the acts
complained of do not fall within the definition of the said law.
○ The law under which Jabalde was charged, tried and found guilty of violating is Section 10
(a)1, Article VI, of R.A. No. 76102. However, the Court held that only when the laying of
hands is shown beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the accused to debase, degrade
or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being should it be punished
as child abuse3, otherwise, it is punished under the RPC. Jabalde was accused of slapping
and striking Lin, hitting the latter on his nape, and immediately thereafter, choking the said
offended party causing the latter to sustain injuries. However, the records of the case do not
show that Jabalde intended to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of
Lin as a human being.
○ The laying of the hands on Lin was an offshoot of Jabalde's emotional outrage after being
informed that her daughter's head was punctured, and whom she thought was already dead.
Moreover, the testimony of the examining physician, Dr. Muñoz, belied the accusation that
Jabalde, with cruelty and with intent, abused, maltreated and injured Lin. If Jabalde indeed
intended to abuse, maltreat and injure Lin, she would have easily hurt the 7-year-old boy
with heavy blows.
○ In fine, the essential element of intent was not established with the prescribed degree of
proof required for a successful prosecution under Section 10 (a), Article VI of R.A. No. 7610.
2. W/O under the facts established, the lower court erred in appreciating the acts of Jabalde as
constitutive of violation of Section 10 (a), Article VI of R.A. No. 7610.
● Supreme Court:
○ Yes, the lower court erred in appreciating the acts of Jabalde as constitutive of
violation of Section 10 (a), Article VI of R.A. No. 7610.
○ Jabalde is liable for slight physical injuries under Article 266 (2) of the RPC.
○ That Jabalde lacked the intent to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity
of the child as a human being as required under Section 10 (a), Article VI of R.A. No. 7610,
her acts of laying hands against Lin showed the essential element of intent which is a
prerequisite in all crimes punishable under the RPC.
1
SEC. 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the Child's Development.
(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for other conditions
prejudicial to the child's development including those covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, but not
covered by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.
2
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE,
EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
ARTICLE VI. Other Acts of Abuse
3
SEC.3, par. (b) refers "Child abuse" as the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the following:
(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;
(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being;
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival, such as food and shelter; or
(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured child resulting in serious impairment of his growth and development
or in his permanent incapacity or death.
○ Nevertheles, in the case at bar, the positive testimonies of the minor victim Lin that Jabalde
slapped him on his neck and choked him, and that of Ray Ann that she saw Jabalde struck
Lin on his neck, squeezed it and then shouted, "Better that you are able to free yourself
because if not I should have killed you," deserve more credit than Jabalde's own statement
that she merely held Lin still because the latter kept on jumping. The laying of the hands and
the utterance of words threatening the life of Lin established the fact that Jabalde, indeed,
intended to cause or inflict physical injuries on, much less kill, Lin.
RULING
WHEREFORE,the Decision dated August 12, 2010 and Resolution dated January 4, 2011 of the Court of
Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 00424 are SET ASIDE;and a new judgment is ENTERED (a) finding petitioner
Virginia Jabalde y Jamandron GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of SLIGHT PHYSICAL
INJURIES under paragraph 2, Article 266, of the Revised Penal Code, and (b) sentencing her to suffer the
penalty of one (1) day to ten (10) days of arresto menor.
SO ORDERED.
OTHER NOTES
● The penalty for slight physical injuries is arresto menor, which ranges from one (1) day to thirty (30)
days of imprisonment.
● In imposing the correct penalty, however, the Court has to consider the mitigating circumstance of
passion or obfuscation under Article 13 (6) of the RPC, because Jabalde lost his reason and
self-control, thereby diminishing the exercise of his will power.
○ There is passional obfuscation when the crime was committed due to an uncontrollable burst
of passion provoked by prior unjust or improper acts, or due to a legitimate stimulus so
powerful as to overcome reason. For passion and obfuscation to be considered a mitigating
circumstance, it must be shown that: (1) an unlawful act sufficient to produce passion and
obfuscation was committed by the intended victim; (2) the crime was committed within a
reasonable length of time from the commission of the unlawful act that produced the
obfuscation in the accused's mind; and (3) the passion and obfuscation arose from lawful
sentiments and not from a spirit of lawlessness or revenge. With her having acted under the
belief that Lin had killed her daughter, Jabalde is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of
passion and obfuscation.
● Arresto menor is prescribed in its minimum period (i.e.,one [1] day to ten [10] days) when only
mitigating circumstance is present in the case. Accordingly, with the Indeterminate Sentence Law
being inapplicable due to the penalty imposed not exceeding one year, Jabalde shall suffer a
penalty of one (1) day to ten (10) days of arresto menor.
