This case has been cited 8 times or more.
|
2013-09-18 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Based on the foregoing provision, the elements of rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) such act was accomplished through force or intimidation; or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or when the victim is under 12 years of age.[11] | |||||
|
2013-07-10 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The existence of the first three elements was established by AAA's testimony. Relevant are the pronouncements of the Court in People v. Manjares[41] that:In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, as in this case. There is a plethora of cases which tend to disfavor the accused in a rape case by holding that when a woman declares that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed and, where her testimony passes the test of credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof. Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly declared that it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story which would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame. For this reason, courts are inclined to give credit to the straightforward and consistent testimony of a minor victim in criminal prosecutions for rape. (Citations omitted.) | |||||
|
2013-06-05 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In view of the foregoing, we therefore affirm the conviction of appellant for qualified rape for which he is to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole in consonance with Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and Republic Act No. 9346. The award of civil indemnity and exemplary damages is likewise upheld. However, in line with jurisprudence, the award of moral damages is increased from Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) to Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00).[18] | |||||
|
2013-04-03 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| As to the third element of the crime, both the RTC and the Court of Appeals ruled that it was duly proven as well, giving weight and credence to AAA's testimony. AAA was able to describe in detail how accused-appellant mounted her, undressed her, and successfully penetrated her against her will, one night in April 1998. The RTC described AAA's testimony to be "frank, probable, logical and conclusive,"[23] while the Court of Appeals declared it to be "forthright and credible"[24] and "impressively clear, definite, and convincing."[25] Relevant herein is our pronouncements in People v. Manjares[26] that: In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, as in this case. There is a plethora of cases which tend to disfavor the accused in a rape case by holding that when a woman declares that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed and, where her testimony passes the test of credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof. Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly declared that it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story which would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame. For this reason, courts are inclined to give credit to the straightforward and consistent testimony of a minor victim in criminal prosecutions for rape. | |||||
|
2013-01-30 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| According to the foregoing provision, the elements of rape are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) such act was accomplished through force or intimidation; or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or when the victim is under 12 years of age.[17] In the case at bar, the prosecution insists that the elements of carnal knowledge and force or intimidation are present. | |||||
|
2012-12-05 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| As cemented in jurisprudence, the elements of rape under the said provision of law are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) such act was accomplished through force or intimidation; or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or when the victim is under 12 years of age.[14] Thus, sexual intercourse with a girl below 12 years old, which is the subject of this case, is considered as statutory rape in this jurisdiction. | |||||
|
2012-10-17 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| According to the foregoing provision, the elements of rape are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) such act was accomplished through force or intimidation; or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or when the victim is under 12 years of age.[11] | |||||
|
2012-06-13 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In People v. Manjares,[19] we reiterated the basic principles that: In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, as in this case. There is a plethora of cases which tend to disfavor the accused in a rape case by holding that when a woman declares that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed and, where her testimony passes the test of credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof. x x x. | |||||