This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-02-13 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The Solicitor General concedes that the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty based on the twin circumstances of relationship and minority considering that the Amended Information failed to allege specifically Remilyn's age. What justifies the imposition of the death penalty, the Solicitor General argues, is the fact that appellant used a knife in committing the rape and appellant perpetrated the rape against his own sister. According to the Solicitor General, Article 335 as amended by RA 7659 provides that the use of a deadly weapon in the commission of rape results in the imposition of the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. Applying Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code, the presence of an aggravating circumstance warrants the imposition of the higher penalty of death. The Solicitor General points out that relationship in this case is an aggravating circumstance based on Article 15[43] of the Revised Penal Code as applied in People v. Baldino.[44] | |||||
|
2001-08-09 |
GONZAGA-REYES, J. |
||||
| The fact that such mental retardation, or the accused's knowledge thereof, was subsequently brought into evidence, does not work to amend the charges as laid out in the information, which altogether preclude the conviction of the accused for qualified rape. However, the fact of relationship of the offender with the victim, duly alleged in the information and proven in trial, being an alternative circumstance under Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code, may be treated as a generic aggravating circumstance in the crimes of rape and acts of lasciviousness,[16] and will justify the award of exemplary damages.[17] | |||||