This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2003-10-01 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| The defense argument that the accused has not employed force upon his daughter in order to have sex with him does not at all persuade. The force or violence necessary in rape is a relative term that depends not only on the age, size, and strength of the persons involved but also on their relationship to each other. In a rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the former's parental authority and moral ascendancy over the latter substitutes for violence or intimidation who, expectedly, would just cower in fear and resign to the father's wicked deeds. It would be plain fallacy to say that the failure to shout or to offer tenacious resistance makes voluntary the victim's submission to the criminal act of the offender.[24] | |||||
|
2003-04-11 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| xxx xxx xxx The force or violence necessary in rape is a relative term that depends on the age, size and strength of the persons involved and their relationship to each other.[46] What is essential is that the act was accomplished against the will of the aggrieved person and in spite of her resistance.[47] However, the Court has ruled that in a rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the father's parental authority and moral ascendancy over his daughter substitutes for violence and intimidation.[48] | |||||
|
2003-04-11 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| In People v. Rodriguez[55] (which involved the rape of a 16-year-old girl by her father), the Court held, "It would be plain fallacy to say that the failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance makes voluntary the victim's submission to the criminal act of the offender." It is quite enough that the victim repeatedly tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to resist the advances.[56] As shown earlier, complainant herein testified that appellant forced her to spread her legs. Furthermore, appellant made complainant drink tuba which weakened her and made it easier to violate her. Clearly, therefore, appellant committed rape as defined under Article 266-A, paragraph 1, subparagraph (a) above mentioned. | |||||
|
2002-08-07 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| commission of the offense.[89] Hence, in addition to moral damages of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos for each count of rape, accused-appellant must be likewise be sentenced to pay an additional amount of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos for each count of rape as civil indemnity in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[90] WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS with MODIFICATION the appealed decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 28, Manila, in Criminal Cases Nos. 94-137790 and 94-137791. Accused-appellant Leonardo Dumanlang y Enriquez is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two | |||||