G.R. No. 121768 July 21, 1997
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Domingo Castillo, Jr., accused-appellant.

FACTS

On November 6, 1993, between 7:30 and 8:30 PM, accused-appellant Domingo Castillo, Jr. (“Boyet”) and his father, the victim Domingo Castillo, Sr., were drinking beer at the D & G Restaurant in Norzagaray, Bulacan. After about two hours, the victim urged his son to go home to avoid potential trouble from newly arrived noisy customers. They boarded a blue pick-up truck, with the appellant driving and the victim in the passenger seat. During the trip home to Angat, Bulacan, an argument ensued because the appellant insisted on returning to the restaurant while the victim prevented him. Upon nearing their house, the appellant abruptly stopped the vehicle and the victim alighted. Holding a beer bottle, the victim raised his hands, stood in front of the pick-up, and said, “sige kung gusto mo sagasaan mo ako, hindi ka makakaalis.” The appellant slowly drove forward as if to intimidate the victim, who then exclaimed, “papatayin mo ba ako?” The appellant then backed up the vehicle, almost hitting an owner-type jeep where eyewitness Ma. Cecilia Mariano and others were seated. Subsequently, at high speed, he drove forward, hitting the victim. Not satisfied, he put the vehicle in reverse, running over the victim a second time. The appellant then alighted and walked towards his house, leaving the vehicle in the street. Another witness, Arthur Agaran, who was at the victim’s residence, saw the pick-up move forward and backward four times. He and a co-worker found the victim’s bloodied body on the ground and rushed him to the hospital, where he died. Initially passed off as an accident, the victim’s older sister, Leslie C. Padilla, later suspected foul play upon her return from the U.S. and engaged the NBI for an investigation. This led to the filing of an information for parricide. The Regional Trial Court of Bulacan found the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of parricide and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay P250,000.00 as actual damages.

ISSUE

Whether the parricide was committed through reckless imprudence, as claimed by the appellant, or with criminal intent.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for parricide. The prosecution successfully established all elements of parricide: (1) the death of the deceased; (2) that he was killed by the accused; and (3) that the deceased was a legitimate ascendant of the accused. The Court rejected the appellant’s claim of reckless imprudence, finding the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Mariano and Agaran credible and indicative of deliberate intent. The appellant’s actions—intimidating the victim by moving the vehicle forward, backing up to gain momentum, accelerating at high speed to hit the victim, running over him a second time, and then alighting and walking away without immediately summoning help—demonstrated a deliberate intent to kill, inconsistent with the idea of reckless imprudence. The Court modified the damages, deleting the unproven award of P250,000.00 in actual damages and ordering the appellant to pay P50,000.00 as moral damages to the victim’s heirs. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.