Case Digest (G.R. No. 167756)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Jerry Nazareno, G.R. No. 167756, April 09, 2008, the Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, J., writing for the Court.The accused is Jerry Nazareno; the private complainants are his daughters (identified in the record by the fictitious initials AAA and BBB) and their mother CCC. AAA was born April 30, 1983; BBB was born June 24, 1984.
AAA testified that beginning in about 1990, when she was seven years old, her father repeatedly forced her to assume a crouching posture ("baka-bakahan"), removed her garments and inserted his penis into her vagina; she identified the last occasion as March 25, 1996 (her elementary graduation day). BBB testified that beginning in about January 1992, when she was in Grade II (about eight years old), her father forced her into a four‑limbed position ("pig baka‑baka"), removed her shorts and panties and had penile intercourse with her; she further testified that on December 6, 1998, appellant inserted his finger into her vagina, causing pain. Both girls said appellant threatened to kill them or the family if they told. They revealed the abuse to their mother on October 27, 1998. On February 16, 1999, CCC, AAA and BBB filed a complaint; the girls were examined the same day by Dr. Erlinda H. Arcilla, who found healed hymenal lacerations.
On March 17, 1999, the prosecutor filed Criminal Case No. 2638 (rape of BBB) alleging the offense occurred "sometime and between January 1992 up to December 06, 1998" in Barangay Codon, San Andres, Catanduanes. On May 3, 1999, Criminal Case No. 2650 (rape of AAA) was filed alleging the offense occurred "from sometime in January 1990 up to December 1998" in the same place. At trial the defense consisted of appellant's denial and an alibi claim (he said he was on a motor launch in December 1998).
On October 25, 2002, the Regional Trial Court convicted appellant in both cases and sentenced him to death for each rape; it also awarded civil indemnity, moral damages and costs. Pursuant to People v. Mateo, the case was transmitted to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review because of the death sentences. On February 22, 2005, the Court of Appeals affirmed with modification: it affirmed guilt but modified the indemnity (increasing civil indemnity to P75,000 each), affirmed moral damages of P50,000 each and added exemplary damages of P25,000 each, while still affirming the death sentences. The appellate court transmitted the records to the Supreme Court for appropriate action.
Before the Supreme Court appellant raised, as his lone appellate assignment of error, that both Informations were fatally defective for failing to state precise dates o...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was appellant's objection to the vagueness of the dates in the Informations timely and, if not, did the Informations nevertheless violate his constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation?
- Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt the multiple rapes charged in each Information, or only discrete rape incidents?
- Was the act proven on December 6, 1998 (insertion of appellant’s finger into BBB’s vagina) properly charged as rape under the traditional Article 335 definition, or as rape by sexual assault under Article 266-A (paragraph 2) as amended by R.A. No. 8353?
- What are the appropriate penalties and damages in light of the co...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)