PEOPLE V.

 JESSIE HALOC
G.R. No. 227312, 5 September 2018 On appeal, the CA affirmed the convictions,
Bersamin J. observing that even Dr. Escuadra had testified that
the mental condition of the accused-appellant had
To be exempting from criminal responsibility, insanity improved; that during the last time that he had
is the complete deprivation of the intelligence in consulted with her, he had no longer shown psychotic
committing the criminal act. Mere abnormality of the signs and symptoms; that his mental condition could
mental faculties does not exempt from criminal not be a mitigating circumstance because no
responsibility. evidence had been presented showing that his mental
condition had diminished his will power.
FACTS:
Hence, this appeal.
Accused-appellant Jessie Haloc y Codon,
then fifty-one (51) years old, was apprehended by ISSUE:
barangay officials after he hacked Allan de la Cruz,
nine (9) years and his brother Amel, four (4) years old, (a) Whether or not the accused could be
inside the de la Cruz's yard at Barangay Union, held guilty of murder and attempted
Gubat, Sorsogon on June 22, 2008 at around 12 murder.
noon. Amel died as a result of the hacking blow to his (b) Whether or not the exempting
neck, while Allan sustained injuries on his upper arm. circumstance of insanity will apply in
this case.
According to the Joint Inquest Memorandum,
the accused, who was armed with a 24-inch bolo, HELD:
went to the dela Cruzes' and attempted to strike the
victims' father, Ambrosio who was able to escape. (a) Yes, there is no denying that the crimes
Unfortunately, Ambrosio's five (5) sons were following committed by the accused-appellant were murder and
him. Jessie took his ire on Ambrosio's children, attempted murder. Allan dela Cruz, the victim in the
hacking Allan on the arm and taking Amel and cutting attempted murder, declared that the accused-
his neck, severing the jugular veins and nearly appellant had stormed into their house in order to
decapitating his head resulting to Amel's immediate hack Ambrosio, the victims' father, but Ambrosio had
death. been able to escape the assault by running away. His
escape prompted his five sons, including Amel and
Two separate informations were filed against Allan, to run away after him. The accused-appellant
him- one for Attempted Murder as to Allan and one pursued them, and he first hacked the 9-years old
for Murder as to Arnel. The accused pleaded not Allan, hitting him in the arm, and then seized the 4-
guilty. year old Amel, hacking him in the neck causing his
instantaneous death.
As a defense, he submits that he was
entitled to the benefit of the exempting circumstance The informations charged the accused-
of insanity alleging that he was insane at the time of appellant with murder and attempted murder, averring
his assaults and therefore, he should not be criminally that the crimes were committed with treachery. The
responsible for the death and injuries he had inflicted. convictions were warranted. The killing of or assault
He presented as witnesses his sister, Araceli Haloc- against a child by an adult assailant is always treated
Ayo and his wife, Suson Haloc, who testified that prior as treacherous, even if the treacherous manner of the
to the incident, the accused suffered a mental assault is not shown. Indeed, the weakness of the
disorder and that he was brought to the hospital for minor victim because of his tender years results in the
treatments because he got violent and could not absence of any danger or risk to the adult assailant.
recognize members of his family, after which he got
well. Dr. Escuadra, a psychiatrist, also testified that (b) No, the accused failed to establish the
the accused was a patient of Don Susano Memorial exempting circumstance of insanity.
Mental Hospital based on their records.
The defense of insanity rests on the test of
The RTC rejected the defense of insanity, cognition on the part of the accused. Insanity, to be
and convicted the accused-appellant of the crimes of exempting, requires the complete deprivation of
Attempted Murder and Murder ruling that there was intelligence, not only of the will, in committing the
no evidence to show that he had been totally deprived criminal act. Mere abnormality of the mental faculties
of reason; that he had presented no competent will not exclude imputability. The accused must be so
witness to establish his insanity; and that his insane as to be incapable of entertaining a criminal
witnesses had even declared that he had been intent. He must be deprived of reason, and must be
treated in 2003 and on April 18, 2008, which, when shown to have acted without the least discernment
taken together with the presumption of law in favor of because there is a complete absence of the power to
sanity, doomed his defense of insanity. discern or a total deprivation of freedom of the will.
 Insanity may be shown by surrounding
circumstances fairly throwing light on the subject,
such as evidence of the alleged deranged
person's general conduct and appearance, his
acts and conduct inconsistent with his previous
character and habits, his irrational acts and
beliefs, and his improvident bargains.

Evidence of insanity must have reference to

the mental condition of the person whose sanity is in
issue, at the very time of doing the act which is the
subject of inquiry. However, it is permissible to receive
evidence of his mental condition for a reasonable
period both before and after the time of the act in
question. Direct testimony is not required nor the
specific acts of derangement essential to establish
insanity as a defense. The vagaries of the mind can
only be known by outward acts: thereby we read the
thoughts, motives and emotions of a person; and
through which we determine whether his acts conform
to the practice of people of sound mind.

Based on the foregoing, the accused-

appellant did not establish the exempting
circumstance of insanity. His mental condition at the
time of the commission of the felonies he was
charged with and found guilty of was not shown to be
so severe that it had completely deprived him of
reason or intelligence when he committed the felonies
charged. Based on the records, he had been
administered medication to cure his mental illness, but
there was no showing that he suffered from complete
deprivation of intelligence. On the contrary, the
medical professionals presented during the trial
conceded that he had been treated only to control his
mental condition.

There was also no showing that the

accused-appellant's actions manifested his insanity
immediately after the hacking incidents. His own
sister, Araceli Haloc-Ayo, declared that he had
recognized her and had surrendered the bolo to her
after his deadly assault. Clearly, he had not been
totally deprived of the capacity of cognition.

In view of all the foregoing, the accused-

appellant's actions and actuations prior to,
simultaneously with and in the aftermath of the
lethal assaults did not support his defense of
insanity. This, coupled with the presumption of
law in favor of sanity, now warrants the affirmance
of his convictions, for he had not been legally
insane when he committed the felonies.