Case Digest (G.R. No. 66038)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Vicente Lualhati, G.R. No. 66038, March 16, 1989, the Supreme Court First Division, Grino-Aquino, J., writing for the Court.
The prosecution arose from a complaint filed by Josephine M. Dimaunahan, an 11‑year‑old girl, in the Municipal Court of Candelaria, Quezon, alleging that her mother's common‑law husband, Vicente Lualhati (the appellant), had carnal knowledge of her in or about June 1978 and on other occasions. Attached to the complaint was a sworn statement dated August 8, 1978, taken before a military officer, wherein Josephine affirmed that appellant abused her before the start of classes in June 1978.
Following preliminary investigation the case was forwarded to the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Quezon, and on March 21, 1979 the Provincial Fiscal filed an information charging Lualhati with rape, alleging the June 1978 incident and stating aggravating circumstances (relationship and dwelling). Upon arraignment on November 13, 1979, the accused pleaded not guilty. Pretrial motions included a Motion to Dismiss (filed January 5, 1980) arguing that the complaint improperly charged multiple offenses by alleging acts "prior and subsequent thereto," and an earlier Motion to Dismiss (filed December 11, 1978) asserting that the accused had been pardoned by the offended party, her mother, and grandmother, supported by a joint affidavit of desistance dated December 11, 1978.
The Provincial Fiscal filed an addendum (January 6, 1979) contending that the pardon was invalid because the offended party, being eleven at the time, lacked independent will, and because her father, Rodolfo Dimaunahan, had filed an affidavit objecting to the pardon and retained parental authority despite alleged earlier abandonment. The trial court denied the motion to dismiss by order dated March 7, 1979, on the ground that the father insisted on prosecution and had not been judicially deprived of parental authority. A Motion to Quash filed November 9, 1979 was denied November 15, 1979. After trial the CFI convicted Lualhati of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and imposed damages.
The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning error that (1) the complaint charged more than one offense and was therefore void; (2) there was no valid com...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the complaint against Vicente Lualhati void for charging more than one offense?
- Did the pardon executed by the offended party, her mother, and grandmother extinguish the criminal action despite the father...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)