This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2016-02-01 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| At the outset, the Court notes that the Information, dated August 2, 2006, specifically charged petitioner with rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). However, upon the enactment of Republic Act No. 8353 (RA 8353), otherwise known as the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, which became effective on October 22, 1997, rape was reclassified as a crime against persons, thus, repealing Article 335 of the RPC. The new provisions on rape are now found in Articles 266-A to 266-D of the said Code. In the instant case, the crime was committed on May 5, 2006. Hence, the applicable law is the RPC as amended by RA 8353 and that the prosecution as well as the RTC and the CA committed an error in specifying the provision of law which was violated. Nonetheless, it is settled that the failure to designate the offense by statute or to mention the specific provision penalizing the act, or an erroneous specification of the law violated, does not vitiate the information if the facts alleged therein clearly recite the facts constituting the crime charged.[16] The character of the crime is not determined by the caption or preamble of the information nor by the specification of the provision of law alleged to have been violated, but by the recital of the ultimate facts and circumstances in the complaint or information.[17] In the instant case, the body of the Information contains an averment of the acts alleged to have been committed by petitioner and describes acts punishable under Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B, of the RPC, as amended. | |||||
|
2015-08-11 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, the cases of People v. Sanico,[76] People v. Banzuela,[77] Pielago v. People,[78] People v. Rayon, Sr.,[79] People v. Subesa,[80] People v. Anguac,[81] and Los Baños v. Pedro,[82] which were likewise cited by Justice Carpio, involve the issue that an Information only need to allege the ultimate facts, and not the specificity of the allegations contained in the information as to allow the accused to prepare for trial and make an intelligent plea.[83] | |||||
|
2015-08-11 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to the section or subsection of the statute penalizing it. The acts or omissions constituting the offense and the qualifying and aggravating circumstances alleged must be stated in ordinary and concise language; they do not necessarily need to be in the language of the statute, and should be in terms sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is charged and what qualifying and aggravating circumstances are alleged, so that the court can pronounce judgment.[27] The Rules do not require the Information to exactly allege the date and place of the commission of the offense, unless the date and the place are material ingredients or essential elements of the offense, or are necessary for its identification. | |||||