This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2014-06-04 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Basic in the prosecution of statutory rape is that there must be concurrence of the following elements: (1) the victim is a female under 12 years of age or is demented; and (2) the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim.[25] Thus, to successfully convict an accused for said crime, it is imperative for the prosecution to prove that the age of the woman is under 12 years and carnal knowledge took place.[26] | |||||
|
2013-09-18 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Indeed, jurisprudence is replete with instances where the recantation of testimony by the rape victim herself was not accepted by the Court when her previous testimony appeared more trustworthy and believable.[20] | |||||
|
2013-08-28 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The first element of statutory rape, (a) that the victim is a female under 12 years or is demented,[37] was substantiated by the presentation of the Birth Certificate of the victim,[38] while the second element, (b) that the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim,[39] was evidenced by the testimony of the victim herself. Thus, the lower court was correct in sentencing accused-appellant to a penalty of Reclusion Perpetua. | |||||
|
2013-07-17 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| More specifically, the presence of the swelling in AAA's labia majora was an indication of the penetration by the erect penis of the labia majora of the accused. As such, there was sufficient factual foundation for finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape,[24] for, as the Court explains in People v. Teodoro:[25] | |||||