[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
398 views1 page

62 People v. Gimena GR 33877, February 6, 1931

The respondent killed his wife but was found guilty of parricide by the Trial Court. On appeal, the respondent argued he should be exempt from criminal liability due to insanity, claiming somnambulism caused him to kill his wife in his sleep. However, the medical expert found no evidence of somnambulism. The court affirmed the Trial Court's finding, as the respondent was unable to overcome the presumption of sanity.

Uploaded by

GT
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
398 views1 page

62 People v. Gimena GR 33877, February 6, 1931

The respondent killed his wife but was found guilty of parricide by the Trial Court. On appeal, the respondent argued he should be exempt from criminal liability due to insanity, claiming somnambulism caused him to kill his wife in his sleep. However, the medical expert found no evidence of somnambulism. The court affirmed the Trial Court's finding, as the respondent was unable to overcome the presumption of sanity.

Uploaded by

GT
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

People v.

Gimena   
GR 33877, February 6, 1931   
   OTHER NOTES: 
DISPOSITION: 
Petitioner: People of the Philippines 
 
Respondents: Juan Gimena 
Affirmed the Trial Court. 
 
 
SUMMARY:  
 
The respondent killed his wife, and was unable to overthrow the presumption of 
sanity.  
 
DOCTRINE:  
Art 12 (1) - An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a 
lucid interval. 
 
Exempting circumstances: There was a crime, but there was no criminal, due to the 
circumstances that hinder the accused.  
 
Insanity - must be proven as complete deprivation of intelligence, wherein one loses 
reason. The presumption of sanity must be overthrown. The rationale behind this is 
the absence of intelligence. 
 
 
 
FACTS: 
- On  April  9,  1930,  after  helping  his  father-in-law  clean  bamboo,  he  hacked 
his wife, Crispina Diana, with a bolo while she was asleep.  
- He was disarmed and tied by Gregorio and Teodulo (brother of Gimena) 
- Respondent  claims  to  have  killed  her  due  to  her  illicit  relationship,  which 
was adduced by her giving of P2.7 to Apolinar Serno. 
- The  Trial  Court  found  him  guilty  of  parricide  and  sentenced him to cadena 
temporal 
 
ISSUE/S:  
W/N Gimena should be privileged with an exempting circumstance. 
RATIO: 
- The  court  hinged  its  decision  on  the  findings  of  Dr.  Luis  Gomez  that  the 
respondent  did  not  show  any  signs  of  somnambulism  —  contradictory  to 
the respondent’s claim.  
- Although  somnambulism  is  recognized,  it  must  not  only  be  proven  with 
such proof, but it must also be embraced in insanity.  

You might also like