RPC 246 Parricide

CRIME: PARRICIDE

ELEMENTS:

(1) a person is killed;
(2) the deceased is killed by the accused;
(3) the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse of accused.”

PENALTY:

reclusion perpetua to death

PERIOD TO PREPARE COMPLAINT WHEN ARRESTED WITHOUT A WARRANT:

36 hours

Relevant Cases:

“Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; (3) the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse of accused.” People v.Sales October 3, 2011 G.R. No. 177218

"The imposition of parental discipline on children of tender years must always be with the view of correcting their erroneous behavior. A parent or guardian must exercise restraint and caution in administering the proper punishment. They must not exceed the parameters of their parental duty to discipline their minor children. It is incumbent upon them to remain rational and refrain from being motivated by anger in enforcing the intended punishment. A deviation will undoubtedly result in sadism." People v. Sales

"Parricide is differentiated from murder and homicide by the relationship between the killer and his or her victim. Even without the attendant circumstances qualifying homicide to murder, the law punishes those found guilty of parricide with reclusion perpetua to death, prior to the enactment of Republic Act No. (RA) 9346 (An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines). The commission of parricide is punished more severely than homicide since human beings are expected to love and support those who are closest to them. The extreme response of killing someone of one’s own flesh and blood is indeed unnatural and tragic." 

"Parricide is the most terrible and unnatural of crimes." People v. Tibon. G.R. No. 188320 June 29, 2010

"It is said that, in Romulus’ time, there was no penalty for parricide because it was considered a crime too evil ever to be committed. While parricide in those days referred to the murder of one’s own parent or ascendant, the killing of one’s own offspring, which the term’s modern meaning now includes, is equally horrendous and deserving of the stiffest penalty." People v. Tibon. G.R. No. 188320 June 29, 2010

"The relationship between the offender and the victim is a key element in the crime of parricide, which punishes any person “who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants or descendants, or his spouse.”  The relationship between the offender and the victim distinguishes the crime of parricide from murder or homicide.However, the issue in the annulment of marriage is not similar or intimately related to the issue in the criminal case for parricide. Further, the relationship between the offender and the victim is not determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused.

         The issue in the civil case for annulment of marriage under Article 36  of the Family Code  is whether petitioner is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations.  The issue in parricide is whether the accused killed the victim.  In this case, since petitioner was charged with frustrated parricide, the issue is whether he performed all the acts of execution which would have killed respondent as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce it by reason of causes independent of petitioner’s will. At the time of the commission of the alleged crime, petitioner and respondent were married.  The subsequent dissolution of their marriage, in case the petition in Civil Case No. 04-7392 is granted, will have no effect on the alleged crime that was committed at the time of the subsistence of the marriage.  In short, even if the marriage between petitioner and respondent is annulled, petitioner could still be held criminally liable since at the time of the commission of the alleged crime, he was still married to respondent." Pimentel v. People G.R. No. 172060  September 13, 2010