133.

People v Leonor (Sufficient Provocation)

[GR. No. 125053; March 25, 1999]

Facts:
 Dr. Tarlengco (the victim) was in her clinic when Leonor entered and inquired the cost of tooth
extraction; after answering, Leonor left and said that he would come back
 Leonor came back a few minutes later and while Dr. Tarlengco was preparing the materials for
tooth extraction, Leoner barged in and asked for money, stabbed the victim, grabbed her watch
and ran away
 Reynato Baquilod (security guard, one of the witnesses) heard the victim asking for help. After
knowing what happened through the brief statement of Dr. Tarlengco, Baquilod left and chased
Leonor. Upon catching up on Leonor he asked him why he did what he did; Leonor answered
“Sir, hindi ko naman po gusto to. Ginawa ko lang dahil kailangan ng pamilya ko”
 Mr. Tarlengco (father of the victim, one of the witnesses) got a chance to talk to his daughter
while she was still struggling in the hospital; she briefly shared what happened to her father
 Defense version:
o Leonor went inside the clinic and asked for the price of tooth extraction. Dr. Tarlengco
answered that its 150 per tooth; Leonor negotiated that it be 100 per tooth but Dr.
Tarlegco allegedly declined
o Leonor said that he will just look for another clinic but thereafter, the victim agreed to
charge the extraction 100 per tooth. Leonor was made to sit on the dental chair and
before injecting anesthesia, Dr. Tarlengco changed her mind and decided that the price
should still become 150 pe tooth/
o Leonor pushed away the dentist’s hand and that angered her. As Leonor was making
his way out, Dr. Tarlengco cursed and pushed him and thereafter, the victim blacked out
and stabbed the victim
 Leonor contends that the crime should only be homicide for he did not rob the victim and that he
be granted the mitigating circumstance that there was sufficient provocation by the offended
party immediately preceding the offense
 However, the court affirmed that there was robbery for he was found in possession of the
properties of the victim; both the watch and the amount of money was recovered from him

Issue:

1) WON Leonor should be granted the mitigating circumstance he prayed for - NO

Held/Ratio: WHEREFORE, the decision of Branch 274 of the Regional Trial Court of Paraaque in
Criminal Case No. 95-212 is hereby MODIFIED. As modified, accused-appellant CHRISTOPHER CAA
LEONOR is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal of the crime of robbery with homicide,
and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of the victim,
Dr. Teresa Tarlengco, P50,000 as indemnity for death; P44,318 as actual damages; P50,000 as moral
damages; and P25,000 as attorneys fees, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.

No. The provocation sufficient to mitigate an offense must be proportionate to the gravity of the
retaliatory act. Following the statement of the accused, he claims that a push and bad words justify the
retaliation with a knife. Such claim is underserving of belief and does not entitle him the benefit of the
mitigating circumstance.