This case has been cited 8 times or more.
|
2015-11-23 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| (3) That the offended party is another person of either sex.[41] | |||||
|
2015-02-11 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| On the 15 counts of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC in relation to Section 5 of RA 7610, we find that the appellate court erred in the penalty imposed. If the victim is under 12 years of age, the imposable penalty under Article III, Section 5(b) of RA 7610,[29] is reclusion temporal in its medium period, the range of which is from 14 years, 8 months and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law,[30] and in the absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances, the maximum term of the sentence to be imposed shall be taken from the medium period of the imposable penalty, that is reclusion temporal medium, which ranges from 15 years, 6 months and 20 days to 16 years, 5 months and 9 days.[31] The minimum term under the Indeterminate Sentence Law shall be taken from the penalty next lower to the prescribed penalty of reclusion temporal medium, that is reclusion temporal minimum, which ranges from 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months. Thus, the penalty to be imposed for each of the 15 counts of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC in relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610 shall be 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 15 years, 6 months and 20 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. Furthermore, both the civil indemnity and moral damages should be increased to P20,000 and P30,000, respectively, and exemplary damages in the amount of P2,000 should be added, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.[32] | |||||
|
2015-02-09 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Moreover, it is noteworthy that "AAA" was a minor at the time she was raped. The Court has been consistent in giving credence to testimonies of child-victims especially in sensitive cases of rape. In People v. Garcia,[43] it was held that: Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. A young girl's revelation that she had been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and willingness to undergo public trial where she could be compelled to give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily dismissed as mere concoction.[44] | |||||
|
2014-04-02 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| Moreover, "[t]estimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. A young girl's revelation that she had been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and willingness to undergo public trial where she could be compelled to give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily dismissed as mere concoction."[43] | |||||
|
2014-03-12 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| Statutory rape is committed by sexual intercourse with a woman below 12 years of age regardless of her consent, or the lack of it, to the sexual act. Proof of force, intimidation or consent is unnecessary as they are not elements of statutory rape, considering that the absence of free consent is conclusively presumed when the victim is below the age of 12. At that age, the law presumes that the victim does not possess discernment and is incapable of giving intelligent consent to the sexual act. Thus, to convict an accused of the crime of statutory rape, the prosecution carries the burden of proving: (a) the age of the complainant; (b) the identity of the accused; and (c) the sexual intercourse between the accused and the complainant.[25] | |||||
|
2014-01-15 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In line with prevailing jurisprudence, the Court modifies the award of damages as follows: P20,000.00 as civil indemnity;[67] P30,000.00 as moral damages; and P10,000.00 as exemplary damages,[68] for each count of acts of lasciviousness. All amounts shall bear legal interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of finality of this judgment. | |||||
|
2013-10-02 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Likewise, we reiterate the principle that no young girl, such as AAA, would concoct a sordid tale, on her own or through the influence of BBB as per appellant's intimation, undergo an invasive medical examination then subject herself to the stigma and embarrassment of a public trial, if her motive was other than a fervent desire to seek justice. We explained this rule, yet again, in People v. Garcia[16] where we held: Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. A young girl's revelation that she had been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and willingness to undergo public trial where she could be compelled to give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily dismissed as mere concoction. (Citations omitted.) | |||||
|
2013-06-05 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| With regard to the allegation that the accusation of rape was motivated by ill will and revenge, this Court is not surprised at this rather common excuse being raised by offenders in rape cases. We have consistently held that such alleged motives cannot prevail over the positive and credible testimonies of complainants who remained steadfast throughout the trial.[16] Jurisprudence tells us that it is against human nature for a young girl to fabricate a story that would expose herself as well as her family to a lifetime of shame, especially when her charge could mean the death or lifetime imprisonment of her own father.[17] | |||||