CASE DIGEST
THE UNITED STATES vs. EUFRASIO ALANO Y AGBUYA
32 Phil 383
December 1, 1915
Facts:
About 5 o'clock in the afternoon of July 27, 1914, Modesta Carballo, a friend and comadre of
Teresa Marcelo went to her house to make her a present of five tickets for admission to a
cinematograph. Maria Remigio, F. M. Gleach, and Antonina Remigio, went to the
cinematograph; except for Tomas Ramos and his wife, Ricarda Garces. In obedience to the
suggestion of her husband, the defendant, Teresa Marcelo did not accompany the party to the
cinematograph, as one of her children was sick. About half past seven that evening the
defendant, feeling tired, went to bed, while his wife remained at the window looking out and a
little while afterward told her husband that she would go down for a moment to the Chinese
store nearby, which she did.
As Teresa Marcelo was slow in returning and her sick child was crying, Eufrasio Alano left the
house to look for her in the Chinese stores nearby but did not find her. He therefore started to
return home through an alley where he tripped on a wire lying across the way. He then
observed as he stopped that among some grass near a clump of thick bamboo a man was lying
upon a woman in a position to hold sexual intercourse with her, but they both hurriedly arose
from the ground, startled by the noise made by the defendant in stumbling. Alano at once
recognized the woman as his wife, for whom he was looking, and the man as Martin Gonzalez,
who immediately started to run.
Enraged by what he had seen, the defendant drew a fan-knife he had in his pocket and pursued
Martin Gonzalez, although he failed in overtaking him, and, not knowing where he had fled,
returned to the house, where he found his wife Teresa in the act of climbing the stairs. He then
reprimanded her for her disgraceful conduct and immediately stabbed her several times,
although she finally succeeded in entering the house, pursued by her husband and fell face
downwards on the floor near the place where the sick woman Ricarda Garces was lying. The
latter on seeing this occurrence, began to scream and started to run, as did also Teresa Marcelo
who had arisen and gone down the stairs out of the house; but her infuriated husband again
assaulted her and when she reached the ground, she fell on one of the posts beside the stairs.
When the defendant saw her fall, he entered the house, took some clothes and started out in
the direction of Fort McKinley.
Issue: Whether or not the defendant, EUFRASIO ALANO, could be sentenced of Article 247 in the
Revised Penal Code – Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances.
The court’s ruling:
From the record it appears, then, to have been fully proven that, because the defendant caught
his wife, Teresa Marcelo, in the act of committing adultery with Martin Gonzalez, after he had
unsuccessfully pursued the latter, who succeeding in escaping and hiding himself, he assaulted
the adulteress and inflicted upon her twenty-four wounds which produced her death a few
moments afterwards. This crime is provided for in article 423 (Art. 247) of the Penal Code, and
no valid objection to his finding lies in the circumstances that the unfaithful wife was not killed
in the very place where she was caught, for the reason that the wronged husband preferred first
to attack the despoiler of his honor and afterwards the adulterous wife who succeeded in
getting away from the place where she was caught with her paramour.
The assault upon the woman must be understood to be a continuation of the act of the
wronged husband's pursuit of her paramour, who had the good fortune to escape and
immediately get away from the place of the crime. Consequently, although the deceased did not
fall dead in the place where she was caught, but in another place nearby, logically it must be
understood that the case at bar comes within the provisions of the said articles 423 of the Penal
Code.
For the proper imposition of the penalty prescribed by law, account must be taken of the
extenuating circumstance that the defendant acted upon an impulse of passion and
obfuscation, and also of the special circumstance provided in article 11 of the Code, as amended
by Act No. 2142; and, as there is no aggravating circumstance to offset these extenuating ones,
the penalty of destierro (banishment) should be imposed upon him in the minimum degree.
