This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2011-04-13 |
SERENO, J. |
||||
| The Solicitor General's rebuttal of this argument is correct. It is settled that in a rape committed by a father against his own daughter, his moral ascendancy over her substitutes for the violence and intimidation. [20] Even though it was customary for BBB to massage her father since she was 10 years old, it is not totally impossible or contrary to human experience to believe that when she was already 16 and her father decided to rape her, he had to use force by dragging her into the bedroom in order to achieve his purpose. | |||||
|
2009-01-20 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| In the case at bar, the trial court found that accused-appellant, with the use of force, did have sexual intercourse with the victim who was then under 12 years old. His guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, the applicable penalty is only reclusion perpetua and not death, the imposition of which has been abolished. Without the qualifying circumstances, the indemnity should also be reduced from PhP 75,000 to PhP 50,000 only. The award of PhP 50,000 as moral damages is retained.[23] | |||||
|
2002-02-20 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| Although we are convinced of the culpability of accused-appellant in Crim. Cases Nos. DNO-1592 and DNO-1596 for the rape of his daughter and his niece, we hold that the imposition by the trial court of the death penalty in Crim. Case No. DNO-1596 was not correct. Under Sec. 11 of RA 7659,[28] the death penalty shall be imposed for the crime of rape if the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. The special circumstances of minority of the victim and relationship to the accused are in the nature of qualifying circumstances. These must be jointly alleged in the information in order to afford the accused his right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.[29] Otherwise the accused can only be convicted of the crime in its simple form. We note that the Information in Crim. Case No. DNO-1596 failed to allege the attendant circumstance of relationship between Cristelyn and accused-appellant. Because of such omission, accused-appellant can only be convicted of simple rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. | |||||
|
2001-03-16 |
DE LEON, JR., J. |
||||
| Moral damages, which jurisprudence has set at P50,000.00 is granted in recognition of the victim's injury as being inherently concomitant with and necessarily resulting from the odious crime of rape,[50] especially when suffered by an innocent child whose life is forever tainted by a foul and traumatic experience. | |||||
|
2000-11-17 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| As to moral damages, current case law has set the amount of P50,000.00. Moral damages is granted in recognition of the victim's injury as being inherently concomitant with and necessarily resulting from the odious crime of rape,[56] especially where the rape victim is the offender's own innocent daughter who shall forever be haunted by a most unpleasant memory of a beastly father. In addition, exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00[57] must likewise be awarded in the hope of deterring other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from preying upon and sexually abusing their own young daughters. | |||||