Case Digest (G.R. No. 245926)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. XXX, G.R. No. 245926, July 25, 2023, Supreme Court First Division, Gesmundo, C.J., writing for the Court.The case arose from an Information dated July 23, 2015 charging XXX (accused-appellant) with Qualified Rape under Art. 266-A in relation to Art. 266-B(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 8353. The information alleged that on February 24, 2015 the accused, “knowing fully well the minority of his first cousin or relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity,” through force and intimidation and by means of grave abuse of authority, inserted his penis into the vagina of “AAA,” then aged 15, without her consent.
At arraignment on October 22, 2015 the accused pleaded not guilty. During pre-trial the parties stipulated as to: (1) the identity of the accused; (2) that the accused was a relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity of AAA; and (3) that AAA was examined at Northern Mindanao Medical Center (medical certificate code M-OBG‑W‑2015‑002‑870172). Trial ensued. The prosecution presented the victim AAA, her mother BBB, and brother CCC; the defense presented the accused and his sister YYY.
AAA testified that the accused returned to her grandparents’ house around midnight, lay beside her, covered her mouth, touched and undressed her, and inserted his penis into her vagina while threatening to kill her and her father if she reported the incident. A hospital medical certificate indicated an annular hymen with complete laceration at the 4 and 6 o’clock positions. The accused offered an alibi that he spent the evening and early morning at a relative’s birthday celebration some 30 minutes away; his sister corroborated attendance at that celebration.
On November 24, 2017 the Regional Trial Court (Branch 19, Cagayan de Oro City) convicted the accused of Qualified Rape and imposed reclusion perpetua plus P100,000 each as civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals (Cagayan de Oro City) affirmed the RTC decision in a November 29, 2018 decision. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court under the appeal provisions governing cr...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the accused proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape under Art. 266-A of the Revised Penal Code?
- Did the Information sufficiently and precisely allege the qualifying circumstance of relationship required to sustain a conviction for Qualified Rape under Art. 266-B(1)?
- Did the accused’s counsel effectively waive the defect in the Information by stipulation, or does the exception for judicial admissions made through palpable mistake/gross negligence ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)