Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 67 views

    Danafrata V PP

    Uploaded by

    M
    1. Miguel Danofrata was involved in a fight with his wife and neighbors in October 1994 which led to him arming himself with a knife. 2. Danofrata then confronted Alfredo Gonzales and stabbed him fatally without warning. 3. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision that Danofrata was entitled to a mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation given the altercations he was involved in prior to the stabbing. However, the Supreme Court found Danofrata guilty of homicide for Alfredo Gonzales' killing.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Danafrata V PP

    Uploaded by

    M
    67 views2 pages
    1. Miguel Danofrata was involved in a fight with his wife and neighbors in October 1994 which led to him arming himself with a knife. 2. Danofrata then confronted Alfredo Gonzales and stabbed him fatally without warning. 3. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision that Danofrata was entitled to a mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation given the altercations he was involved in prior to the stabbing. However, the Supreme Court found Danofrata guilty of homicide for Alfredo Gonzales' killing.

    Original Description:

    Criminal Law 1 Case

    Original Title

    Danafrata v PP.docx

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Miguel Danofrata was involved in a fight with his wife and neighbors in October 1994 which led to him arming himself with a knife. 2. Danofrata then confronted Alfredo Gonzales and stabbed him fatally without warning. 3. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision that Danofrata was entitled to a mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation given the altercations he was involved in prior to the stabbing. However, the Supreme Court found Danofrata guilty of homicide for Alfredo Gonzales' killing.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    67 views2 pages

    Danafrata V PP

    Uploaded by

    M
    1. Miguel Danofrata was involved in a fight with his wife and neighbors in October 1994 which led to him arming himself with a knife. 2. Danofrata then confronted Alfredo Gonzales and stabbed him fatally without warning. 3. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision that Danofrata was entitled to a mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation given the altercations he was involved in prior to the stabbing. However, the Supreme Court found Danofrata guilty of homicide for Alfredo Gonzales' killing.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Danafrata VS People of the Philippines Facts: At about six oclock in the evening of October 9, 1994, prosecution witness Reynaldo

    Francia was standing in front of his house in Champaca Street, San Roque, Navotas. Then and there he saw petitioner Miguel Danofrata engage in a slugging match with his wife, Leonor. She struck petitioner with a plastic chair, while he punched her by way of retaliation. Petitioner then ran home but shortly afterwards, he rushed outside again, kicking the neighbors he encountered. In turn, without further ado, three of the neighbors whom he had treated so uncivilly ganged up on him and mauled him, causing petitioner to run home anew. Petitioner then armed himself with a knife and went back to the place where he had received a mauling. He proceeded to the house of one Mang Mario Gonzales, the father of Alfredo Loloy Gonzales. Petitioner then challenged Mang Mario to a fight. At this juncture, petitioner spotted Alfredo, who was on his way home. Without warning, petitioner stabbed Alfredo in the chest fatally. Horrified, witness Reynaldo Francia called the police. When the agents of the law arrived, Francia informed them about the incident and later he gave a written statement to SPO1 Daniel Ferrer.[5] Petitioner did not wait for the law enforcers to arrive, but immediately made himself scarce. Prosecution witness Benjamin Bautista, who was then on his way to Gatbonton Street to buy medicine, saw the petitioner fleeing. Bautista observed that petitioners clothing was bloody. He also saw petitioner drop a bladed weapon, which Bautista picked up and turned over to the police investigator.[6] Issue: WON the appellate court correct in sustaining the trial courts finding that the petitioner was entitled to a mitigating circumstance analogous to passion and obfuscation? Contention of the Accused: During the trial, petitioner denied stabbing the victim. He claimed that Alfredo Gonzales accidentally stabbed himself with a knife, following a tumble.

    Contention of the State: Passion and obfuscation exist when (1) there is an act, both unlawful and sufficient to produce such a condition of the mind, and (2) the said act which produced the obfuscation was not far removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable length of time, during which the perpetrator might recover his normal equanimity. There is passion and 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.[31] In this case it was established that petitioner and his wife had a violent altercation and that petitioner was mauled by his neighbors after he kicked some of them for laughing at

    him. These events and circumstances prior to the killing of Alfredo Gonzales could have caused unusual outbursts of passion and emotion on petitioners part. These resulted in the tragic stabbing of the victim thus entitling petitioner to the mitigating circumstance analogous to passion and obfuscation.

    Decision: The accused is declared GUILTY of homicide for the killing of Alfredo Loloy Gonzales. Petitioner is

    You might also like