This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-11-19 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| All told, the courts a quo were correct in convicting the accused-appellant with rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusión perpetua in accordance with Article 266-A in relation to 266-B of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).[40] Further, the accused-appellant shall not be eligible for parole pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9346[41] which states that "[p]ersons convicted of offenses punished with reclusión perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4180, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended."[42] | |||||
|
2013-09-18 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| The Court likewise affirms the penalty of reclusion perpetua meted upon Bacatan for being in accord with Article 266-A in relation to 266-B of the Revised Penal Code.[41] It must be emphasized, however, that he shall not be eligible for parole pursuant to Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9346 which states that "[p]ersons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4180, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended."[42] | |||||
|
2013-09-18 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| The Court, however, finds that Cayanan should be convicted only of Qualified Rape in Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective of the accused is to rape the victim.[10] In this case, circumstances show that the victim's abduction was with the purpose of raping her. Thus, after Cayanan dragged her into the tricycle, he took her to several places until they reached his sister's house where he raped her inside the bedroom. Under these circumstances, the rape absorbed the forcible abduction.[11] | |||||