People V Wilson Antonio, November 7 2002
leave without first obtaining the permission
Murder case against Wilson Antonio Jr.
FACTS:
Wilson Antonio Jr on June 16, 1996 was
carrying a gun and walking towards Sergio Mella’s
House. Wilsons sister followed him and pleaded him
to stop but he ignored her. A few minutes latrer,
gunshots were heard coming from the inside of the
house of Sergio Mella.
Kevin Paul Mella(Sergio Mella’s son) witnessed the
incident. He was lying on the bed beside his father.
He heard that a window glass was shattered the
someone kicked the door and saw Wilson. Wilson
aimed and fired the gun while Sergio is asleep hitting
Sergio in the chest, shoulder and back. The son was
also hit on his left tigh. Wilson hurriedly left after the
shooting.
Events prior to shooting.
He and Mella were drinking when Mella boxed him.
When they went home at 3 oclock in the morning
from the drinking session and just when they parted
ways, 2 gun shots were heard and also he heard
the voice on Mella. He also fired his gun in the air in
response and said “Bobby, I will kill you in 2 days”.
He was having difficulty sleeping because of the
incident and at 7am, he went to Mella’s home and
shot him.
Appelants Defense
Insanity –
Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from
criminal liability. - the following are exempt from
criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless
the latter has acted during a lucid interval.
When the imbecile or an insane person has
committed an act which the law defines as a
felony (delito), the court shall order his
confinement in one of the hospitals or
asylums established for persons thus
afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to
of the same court.
according to Fe Antonito (Mother), accused already
exhibited unusual behaviour ever since he was a
boy. He was moody and short-tempered and
worsened when her husband and another son were
killed by the NPA. She had her treated in 1994 and
was given various medicine. His conditions improved
but at times he refused taking the prescribed drugs.
She was also brought to another Doctor and was
also given prescription drugs. He refused to take the
drugs because he says that it was useless and he still
hear some voices. Accused continue drinking
alcojhol which interfered with the medication
Dr. Rowena Cosca interviewed the accused 2 years
after the commission of the crime and concluded
that accused was suffering from schizo-affective
disorder or phycosis which require long term
treatment. The mental disorder was manifested by
behavioural problems such as auditory hallucinations
and paranoia delusions or persecutory delusion. One
suffering from psychosis does not know what he was
doing and is deprived of his faculty to distinguish
right from wrong.
The mother of the accused last saw her son the day
prior to the incident. Until October 1997 when her
son surrendered.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The mother was not able to observe her son’s
behaviour at the time of the incident. Dr, Cosca was
not able to examine the accused before or
immediately after the commission of the crime.
Hence their testimony cannot be admitted because
they were not present and was not able to observe
the accused hours prior to killing and during the
killing itself.
The accused himself admitted on cross
examination that he killed the victim out of anger
and desire for revenge(when Mella boxed him). As
proof that he is aware of what he did, he fled the
scene after the commission of the crime.
 The trial court convicted the accused of
murder qualified by threachery and aggravated by
the circumstances of evident premeditation,
dwelling and unlawful entry. Treachery was present
since victim was shot during asleep. Other
circumstances were not alleged in the information.
In Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure (2000), every
complaint or information must state not only the
qualifying but also the aggravation circumstances.
Then aggravating circumstances premeditation,
dwelling and unlawful entry not having been alleged
in the information may not now appreciated to
enhance the liability of the accused.

GUILTY OF MURDER QUALIFIED BY TRECHERY IS

AFFIRMED.