GR 37271; (July, 1933) (Digest)
G.R. No. 37271 ; July 1, 1933
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAGDALENA CALISO, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
Magdalena Caliso, a domestic servant, was convicted of murder for poisoning a nine-month-old child, Emilio Esmeralda Jr., with concentrated acetic acid on February 8, 1932, in La Carlota, Occidental Negros. The child died hours later. The trial court found that Caliso administered the poison while the child’s parents were sleeping, motivated by a spirit of revenge after being reprimanded by the child’s mother for using the family bedroom for indecent meetings with her lover. The court considered the aggravating circumstances of treachery (alevosia), abuse of confidence, and commission of the crime in the victim’s dwelling, offset by the mitigating circumstances of lack of instruction and having acted under a powerful impulse producing passion and obfuscation. It sentenced her to reclusion perpetua.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly applied the aggravating and mitigating circumstances in imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the appreciation of circumstances. It held: (1) Treachery is inherent in murder by poisoning and cannot be separately considered as an aggravating circumstance. (2) The circumstance of dwelling should be disregarded as both the accused and victim lived in the same house. (3) The claim of having acted under a powerful impulse (arrebato y obcecación) is without merit, as the act was motivated by lawlessness and revenge, not by a sudden impulse provoked by prior unjust acts of the victim or his parents. (4) The aggravating circumstance of grave abuse of confidence was properly considered, as the accused was a domestic servant and sometimes the child’s amah. This aggravating circumstance was offset by the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction. With these circumstances offsetting each other, the penalty should be imposed in its medium degree, which is reclusion perpetua. Thus, the penalty imposed by the trial court was within the limits fixed by law, and the judgment was affirmed.
AI Generated by Armztrong.