This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-04-01 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Affinity denotes "the relation that one spouse has to the blood relatives of the other spouse."[19] It is a relationship by marriage or a familial relation resulting from marriage. It is a fictive kinship, a fiction created by law in connection with the institution of marriage and family relations.[20] Relationship by affinity refers to a relation by virtue of a legal bond such as marriage. Relatives by affinity, therefore, are those commonly referred to as "in-laws," or stepfather, stepmother, stepchild and the like.[21] | |||||
|
2013-03-13 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| On February 1, 2012, the CA rendered a Decision[13] affirming in toto the RTC's decision. The appellate court explained that despite the fact that the Information charged the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the established factual circumstances therein constitutes the elements of rape penalized under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code such as: (1) that the offender inserted his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice or inserted any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person; and (2) that the same was done to a child below 12 years of age.[14] Citing the case of Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales Vda. De Carungcong v. People,[15] the CA emphasized that it is not the nomenclature of the offense that determines the crime in the Information but the recital of facts of the commission of the offense. The determination by the prosecutor who signs the Information is merely an opinion which is not binding on the court.[16] The CA, moreover, agreed with the RTC in brushing aside the bare self-serving denial of Pielago. He also failed to adduce any evidence to support his claim that AAA was coached by her mother on what she should testify in court. Finding support in current jurisprudence,[17] the CA aptly stated that an accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim so long as it is credible, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[18] Lastly, the CA concurred with the RTC's cognizance of the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender there being no warrant of arrest issued against Pielago. Thus, it decreed, in this wise: | |||||