Case Digest (G.R. No. 137405) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In People of the Philippines v. Delfin dela Cruz, G.R. No. 137405, decided September 27, 2002, the respondent-appellant Delfin dela Cruz was charged by Information dated January 24, 1997 in RTC Branch 46, San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, with rape of his daughter, Marikit dela Cruz, a 16-year-old private complainant, committed on October 24, 1996 at the family farm in Barangay Lagnas, Sablayan. During arraignment on March 5, 1997, he pleaded not guilty. At trial, the prosecution presented Marikit’s straightforward testimony detailing how her father lured her at midnight, threatened her, forcibly undressed and penetrated her twice in a hut one kilometer from their house; a Medico-Legal Certificate dated October 28, 1996 confirming hymenal rupture and labial abrasion; and two letters from appellant admitting guilt and seeking forgiveness. The defense denied the allegations, then conceded fault without admitting sexual abuse. The RTC, finding the victim’s testimony credible and appell Case Digest (G.R. No. 137405) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Procedural Posture
- Appellant Delfin dela Cruz was arraigned on March 5, 1997 and pleaded not guilty to an Information dated January 24, 1997 charging him with rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 (Death Penalty Law).
- On April 14, 1998, the Regional Trial Court of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro (Branch 46) found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt, imposed the capital penalty of death, ordered indemnity of ₱50,000, and directed his transfer to New Bilibid Prisons.
- Factual Antecedents
- Prosecution’s Version
- On the night of October 24, 1996 at around 12:00 AM in a remote hut on the family farm in Barangay Lagnas, Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro, appellant lured his daughter Marikit (age 16) under pretext of an important discussion.
- Once there, he embraced, kissed, undressed and, by force and threat, raped her twice over a period of about four hours. Marikit resisted, cried, and later filed a complaint on October 28, 1996. A medico-legal certificate disclosed an old hymenal tear and an abrasion on the left labia minora. The victim also testified that appellant first abused her at age 13. Appellant wrote two letters admitting he “raped [his] daughter twice.”
- Defense’s Version
- Appellant admitted he was Marikit’s father and that October 24, 1996 was his birthday but denied any rape, claiming only that he once physically punished her during her first year of high school.
- He attributed the allegations to misunderstanding and, for the sake of family, expressed regret without conceding criminal sexual abuse.
Issues:
- Whether the prosecution’s evidence was sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that appellant raped his daughter.
- Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty when the Information did not allege the qualifying circumstances of the victim’s minority and the father-daughter relationship.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)