Previous 24 / 55 Next

A Ecel Araño, the one who testified. Q Did Ecel sleep with you in your house on that evening? A No, because she expressed fears, she said her father would not allow her because of Ben. Q During this period November 15, 1995, were you pregnant? A Yes, 8 months. Q How advance was your pregnancy? A Eight (8) months. Q Was the baby subsequently born? A Yes, sir. Q What's the name of the baby you were carrying at that time? A Marie Bianca. Q What time were you able to meet personally your husband? A Yes, sir. Q What time? A When I arrived home, he was there already in his usual behavior. Q Will you tell this Court what was his disposition? A He was drunk again, he was yelling in his usual unruly behavior. Q What was he yelling all about? A His usual attitude when he got drunk. Q You said that when you arrived, he was drunk and yelling at you? What else did he do if any? A He is nagging at me for following him and he dared me to quarrel him. Q What was the cause of his nagging or quarreling at you if you know? A He was angry at me because I was following x x x him, looking for him. I was just worried he might be overly drunk and he would beat me again. Q You said that he was yelling at you, what else, did he do to you if any?

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

People v. Genosa

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 135981

Date of decision: Jan 15, 2004

Year of decision: 2004

GBV Case Type

Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (VAWC)

Nature of the case: A Married woman who is 8th month pregnant and belongs to the middle-class sector, admitted that she killed her husband, however to avoid criminal liability invokes self-defense and/or defense of her unborn child. In claiming self-defense, the accused-pregnant woman raised the theory of battered woman syndrome. However, the Supreme Court did not heed the affirmative defense raised by the accused but appreciated the same as mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation and under paragraphs 9 and 10 of Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code. As a result, she was convicted but considering the 2 mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance, the penalty imposed on her was reduced to 6 years and 1 day of prison mayor as minimum; to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. Consequently, since she has been detained for more than the minimum penalty imposed on her, the director of BuCor is directed to immediately release the accused from custody upon due determination of her eligibility for parole.

Summary of outcome: The accused is convicted.

However, considering that there are two (2) mitigating circumstance Nos. 9 & 10, Article 13 and No. 6 (Passion and Obfuscation), Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty imposed on her was reduced to six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum; to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. Consequently, since she has been detained for more than the minimum penalty imposed on her, the director of BuCor is directed to immediately release the accused from custody upon due determination of her eligibility for parole.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Affected Sector

Women

Ponente: PANGANIBAN, J.

Long title: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. MARIVIC GENOSA, appellant.

Notes: This is the first case where the Supreme Court acknowledged and fully discussed the "battered-woman syndrome". This is also the first time the said syndrome is appreciated as mitigating circumstance of which will result to reducing the sentence of the accused suffering from the same, as what happened in this case.

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 10.926601

Longitude: 124.434657

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

GENOSA CASE.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

People v. Genosa

Primary Documents

Notifications