Case Digest (G.R. No. L-35241)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Servillano Velasquez, G.R. No. L-35241, February 28, 1983, Supreme Court First Division, Vasquez, J., writing for the Court.The prosecution charged Servillano Velasquez (defendant-appellant) with rape under an information alleging that on or about February 9, 1966, in Licab, Nueva Ecija, he, armed with a bladed instrument, by means of force and intimidation wilfully and feloniously had carnal knowledge of Remedios Domingo (complainant). Remedios was a 15-year-old housemaid employed by Cecilia Velasquez, the sister of the accused; the accused lived in the same house and operated a radio repair shop on the ground floor.
At trial the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija found that sexual intercourse did occur but concluded the elements of force and intimidation were not sufficiently established; it convicted the accused of qualified seduction and imposed an indeterminate penalty (four months and one day of arresto mayor as minimum to one year, eight months and twenty days of prision correccional as maximum), ordered indemnity of P2,000, monthly support for the offspring, and other consequences. The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Solicitor General recommended conviction for rape (punishable by reclusion perpetua), a penalty beyond the Court of Appeals' power, and the Court of Appeals therefore certified the appeal to the Supreme Court for final disposition.
At the Supreme Court, the record showed undisputed intercourse and that Remedios delivered a child on December 22, 1966. The complainant testified that on the night of February 9, 1966 the accused threatened her with death and a bladed weapon, removed her underwear and consummated intercourse; she further testified intercourse was repeated on February 10 and 11. The accused denied any forcible acts, asserted the relations began in late January 1966 and were repeated consensually in daytime at his shop, and disputed paternity, arguing that the interval between last intercourse (allegedly February 11) and delivery made paternity medically unlikely.
The trial court relied on lack of proof of force and intimidation to convict for qualified seduction. The Solici...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the accused be validly convicted of qualified seduction or simple seduction when the information charges rape and the information lacks the essential elements of those seduction offenses?
- Does the evidence establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed rape by force and intimidation with a blad...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)