This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2002-08-22 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| hand, contends that the minority of the victim was proven through her testimony and the testimony of the accused-appellant himself. In prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the extreme penalty of death, nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which an accused is charged must be established.[17] Qualifying | |||||
|
2001-12-19 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Accused-appellant's alibi is unavailing. His claim that, at around 6:00 in the morning of March 17, 1998, he went to barangay Calangan to pick up passengers bound for San Fernando, does not negate the possibility that he might be present in Cayaga at the time of the commission of the crime, since the distance between Cayaga and Calangan is only two kilometers. And even if accused-appellant proceeded to San Fernando, the possibility that he committed the crime cannot be ruled out since the distance of Cayaga to San Fernando is only 26 kilometers, and he was using a motorcycle. For alibi to prosper, it must be shown that it was physically impossible for the accused to have been present at the crime scene at the time of its commission.[28] | |||||
|
2001-12-11 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| II. Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, provides for the imposition of the death penalty on the offender in rape cases if the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is, among others, a parent of the victim. As a qualifying circumstance which increases the range of the penalty, the concurrence of the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender must be both alleged and proven.[35] | |||||
|
2001-11-20 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| To conclude, the crime committed by the appellant is rape with the aggravating circumstance of having been committed in the dwelling of the victim.[24] She was raped in her own home, the sanctity of which the law seeks to protect and uphold. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court. Appellant is convicted of simple rape and the imposable penalty therefor is reclusion perpetua. Where the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied regardless of the mitigating or aggravating circumstances attendant to the crime.[25] Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, we sustain the P50,000.00 awarded as civil indemnity and the P50,000.00 awarded as moral damages.[26] While the trial court correctly awarded exemplary damages due to the presence of one aggravating circumstance, the amount should be reduced to P20,000.00 following recent jurisprudence.[27] | |||||