You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. EUGENIO GUTIERREZ

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2001-01-31
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
SEC. 10. Bill of particulars. - Accused may, at or before arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead and to prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the alleged defects and details desired. The failure to move for specifications or the quashal of the information on any of the grounds provided for in the Rules of Court deprives accused of the right to object to evidence which could be lawfully introduced and admitted under an information of more or less general terms but which sufficiently charges the accused with a definite crime.[21] It is too late in the day for accused-appellant to raise this issue now because objections as to matters of form or substance in the information can not be made for the first time on appeal.[22] Besides, the exact date of the commission of the crime is not an essential element of the crime.[23] In People v. Gianan,[24] the Court held:It is settled that the time of the commission of rape is not an element thereof, as this crime is defined in Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code. The gravamen of the crime is the fact of carnal knowledge under any of the circumstances enumerated therein, i.e. (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. In accordance with Rule 110, Section 11. As long as it alleges that the offense was committed "at any time as near to the actual date at which the offense was committed," an information is sufficient. Thus, in People v. Bugayong,[25] it was held when the time given in the (information) is not the essence of the offense, the time need not be proven as alleged and that the complaint will be sustained if the proof shows that the offense was committed at any time within the period of the statute of limitations and before the commencement of the action. (Italics provided) Indeed, under Rule 110, Section 6 of the Rules of Court, the information need only state "the approximate time of the commission of the offense." Section 11 thereof provides:
2000-12-08
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The failure to move for specifications or the quashal of information on any of the grounds provided for in the Rules of Court deprives accused of the right to object to evidence which could be lawfully introduced and admitted under an information of more or less general terms but which sufficiently charges the accused with a definite crime.[12] It is too late in the day for accused-appellant to raise this issue because objections as to matters of form or substance in the information can not be made for the first time on appeal.[13] Be that as it may, the exact date of the commission of the crime is not an essential element of the crime.[14] In People v. Jesus Gianan y Molina,[15] the Court pointedly stated that: It is settled that the time of the commission of rape is not an element thereof, as this crime is defined in Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code.  The gravamen of the crime is the fact of carnal knowledge under of the circumstances enumerated therein, i.e. (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.  In accordance with Rule 110, Section 11, as long as it alleges that the offense was committed "at any time as near to the actual date at which the offense was committed," an information is sufficient.  Thus, in People v. Bugayong,[16] it was held when the time given in the (information) is not the essence of the offense, the time need not be proven as alleged and that the complaint will be sustained if the proof shows that the offense was committed at any time within the period of the statute of limitations and before the commencement of the action.[17]