Title
Supreme Court
People vs. YYY
Case
G.R. No. 262941
Decision Date
Feb 20, 2024
YYY was convicted for child pornography involving her niece, utilizing a computer system to exploit minors, leading to a harsh sentence and fines.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 262941)

Applicable Law

Republic Act No. 9775 (Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009)
Republic Act No. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012)
Republic Act No. 11930 (Anti-Online Sexual Abuse or Exploitation of Children and Anti-Child Sexual Abuse or Exploitation Materials Act)
Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure

Factual Background

In July 2016, the FBI intercepted e-mails from YYY offering nude photographs and webcam shows of minor girls for sale to online customers. Coordinates traced the activity to Angeles City, Pampanga. An undercover FBI agent communicated with YYY, who provided payment details and access to sexual content involving minors and proposed in-person meetings.

Surveillance and Initial Verification

Upon receipt of a request from the U.S. Embassy’s Legal Attaché, PNP Anti-Trafficking in Persons Division acting chief Col. Villamar Tuliao instructed PSI Mary Gallano and PSI Jigs Madato to verify. Surveillance revealed YYY selling her house in Mabalacat City. When posing as property buyers on August 6, 2016, the officers toured the residence and observed minor girls, a computer with webcam, a vibrator, children’s undergarments, and furnishings matching FBI evidence.

Search Warrant Application and Issuance

On August 11, 2016, Col. Tuliao filed for a warrant before RTC Judge Ramon Pamular. After personal examination under oath of the applicant and witness and review of supporting documents, the judge issued a warrant describing the specific address and enumerating items to be seized, including computer equipment, electronic devices, pornographic materials, children’s items, financial receipts, sex toys, and a vehicle.

Execution of the Search Warrant

On August 16, 2016, law enforcers, accompanied by barangay officials, served the warrant on YYY’s residence. They seized marked computer sets, a Wi-Fi modem, receipts, a vibrator, a Hello Kitty poster, a Samsung cellphone, vehicle documents, CDs, and other items. An inventory was made in YYY’s presence and that of barangay officials. Three minors—AAA, BBB, and CCC—were rescued and turned over to the DSWD.

Trial Court Proceedings

The RTC charged YYY under Sections 4(a), (b), and (c) of RA 9775, in relation to Section 16 thereof, and Section 4(c)(2) of RA 10175, alleging inducement of her niece AAA (6 years old) to produce child pornography via computer. YYY pleaded not guilty, denied the allegations, and contended that the search was unlawful and evidence fabricated.

RTC Decision and Sentence

On July 9, 2020, the RTC found YYY guilty beyond reasonable doubt. It credited AAA’s testimony, admitted digital forensic results and seized items, and dismissed YYY’s denial as uncorroborated. YYY was sentenced to reclusion perpetua, a PHP 2,000,000 fine, PHP 50,000 moral damages, and PHP 100,000 exemplary damages.

Court of Appeals Ruling

On February 28, 2022, the CA affirmed the conviction and sentence. It upheld the trial court’s assessment of credibility, held that an approximate date in the Information did not prejudice YYY’s defense, and ruled the search warrant valid for specifying place and items. Deference was accorded to the trial court’s firsthand observation of witness demeanor.

Repeal and Reenactment Issue

Subsequent to the CA ruling, RA 11930 repealed RA 9775 and Section 4(c)(1) of RA 10175 but reenacted and expanded materially identical prohibited acts. The Supreme Court addressed whether repeal without a saving clause extinguished YYY’s liability.

Supreme Court on Repeal with Reenactment

Under the 1987 Constitution, an unqualified repeal generally extinguishes criminal liability, except when the repealing law reenacts the same offenses. RA 11930’s reenactment of child-pornography provisions neutralizes the repeal of RA 9775, preserves pending prosecutions, and confirms legislative intent to continue penalizing these acts.

Elements of Child Pornography and Evidentiary Findings

RA 9775 defines child pornography as any representation of a child in explicit sexual activities by electronic or other means. Its elements are: (1) the victim is a child; (2) the offender induced or produced sexual content; and (3) the material was represented visually, audibly, or in combination. The prosecution proved AAA’s minority (6 years old at the time), YYY’s coercion to produce nude photos and videos via computer, and digital evidence of images and online transactions.

Credibility of the Minor Victim’s Testimony

Both courts gave highest respect to the trial court’s evaluation of AAA’s demeanor, noting no overlooked circumstance affecting her credibility. YYY’s bare denial carried no weight absent clear proof of motive to lie. The victim’s inability to recall an exact date was immaterial.

Validity

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.

About Privacy Terms