This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2011-11-14 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| A finding that the accused is guilty of rape may be based solely on the victim's testimony if such testimony meets the test of credibility.[51] We held that no woman, much less a child of such tender age, would willingly submit herself to the rigors, the humiliation and the stigma attendant upon the prosecution of rape, if she were not motivated by an earnest desire to put the culprit behind bars.[52] | |||||
|
2008-10-17 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Q. You stated that you were in Grade III when the accused abused you and you said you could recall it was in 1997, is it not a fact that your Grade III lasted from 1997 to 1998 are you aware of that? A. Yes, ma'am. Q. So the rape or abuses on you by the accused happened within 1997 up to 1998, do you agree with that? A. Yes, ma'am.[14] The gravamen of Statutory Rape is the carnal knowledge of a woman below twelve years old.[15] Proof of force is not an element, as the absence of a free consent is presumed. Conviction will lie provided sexual intercourse is proven.[16] | |||||
|
2003-02-12 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Consequently, the said documentary evidence may not be appreciated pursuant to Section 34 of Rule 132 of the Rules of Court which provides that "(t)he court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered."[44] | |||||
|
2003-02-06 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The three informations allege that Maria Teresa was 13 years old at the time of the commission of the crimes. Her birth certificate[47] presented during the trial shows, however, that she was born on December 11, 1983. Hence, she was 11 years and 10 months old when the first and second rape incidents took place in October 1995 and 12 years and 10 months Old when the third rape incident occurred in November 1996. Since the elements of a crime must be set out in the complaint or information to apprise the accused of the crime of which he is being charged,[48] the allegation in the informations in Criminal Case Nos. 97-CR-2738 and 97-CR-2740 covering the incidents which occurred in 1995 that Maria Teresa was 13 years old can not be deemed to have been modified by the date of her birth appearing in the birth certificate. Undoubtedly, however, she was a minor, below 18 years of age, when the rape incidents of October 1995 took place. | |||||
|
2001-11-14 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| The Court, however, does not agree with the penalty imposed by the court a quo upon the appellant. In People v. Brigildo,[13] People v. Tipay,[14] People v. Cula,[15] People v. Licanda,[16] People v. Tabanggay,[17] and People v. Canonigo,[18] the Court had the occasion to discuss the need to prove beyond reasonable doubt the age of the victim in prosecutions for incestuous rape. | |||||