THE UNITED STATES vs.

HILARIO DE LA CRUZ
Doctrines/Principles:
Art 13, par. 6. The ff. are mitigating circumstances:
6. That having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation.
FACTS:

 Defendant, in the heat of passion, killed his querida (concubine/lover) upon catching her red-
handed in carnal communication with a mutual acquaintance.
 Trial court: convicted him of the crime of homicide and sentenced him to 14 years 8 months 1
day of reclusion temporal
ISSUE:
WON there is an extenuating/mitigating circumstance present – YES
RULING:
Modified by a finding that the commission of the crime was marked with the extenuating circumstance set
out in subsection 7 of article 9, and by the reduction of the penalty of fourteen years eight months and one
day of reclusion temporal to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, the judgment of
conviction and the sentence imposed by the trial court should be and are hereby affirmed, with the
costs of this instance against the appellant.
RATIO:
The Court is of opinion that the defendant acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have
produced passion and obfuscation, which the law declares to be one of the mitigating circumstances,
when he caught his querida in carnal communication with another person.
The Court mentioned the view of the Court of Spain due to having similar state of facts:
o A man who kills his lover for having caught her in her underclothes with another man and
afterwards shoots himself, inflicting a serious wound, is responsible for the crime but with
extenuating circumstance considered because he acted as such due to strong emotion. The
situation presents a sufficient impulse in the natural and ordinary course to produce the violent
passion and obfuscation which the law regards as a special reason for extenuation.
The Court also differentiate this case from US vs Hicks:
o US vs. Hicks: the cause of the alleged passion and obfuscation of the defendant was his vexation,
disappointment, and deliberate anger because of the woman’s refusal to live with him. The act of
killing was done with premeditation and preparation. Prior to the accomplishment of his criminal
design, he acted properly in front of his victim in order to mask his true intentions.
o This case: the impulse upon which the defendant acted and which naturally produced passion and
obfuscation was because of the sudden discovery of her in flagrante in the arms of another.