This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-01-15 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| of residential lot registered in their name, located in Camarin, Caloocan City. After trial, the RTC rendered a Decision[2] on October 8, 2001 in favor of the plaintiffs. The RTC ruled, among other things, that as owners of the subject property, plaintiffs have a better right over the property as against the defendants. The | |||||
|
2001-10-03 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Second. We likewise hold, however, that the trial court erred in sentencing accused-appellant to death. To warrant the imposition of the death penalty, the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender must be both alleged and proved. It would be a denial of the right of the accused to due process and to be informed of the charges against him if he is charged with simple rape and thereafter convicted of rape in its qualified form.[27] It is the concurrence of the victim's minority and her relationship to the accused which qualifies the rape as a heinous crime and warrants the imposition of the supreme penalty of death.[28] | |||||