Title
People vs. Dadulla y Capanas
Case
G.R. No. 172321
Decision Date
Feb 9, 2011
Father convicted of simple rape and acts of lasciviousness against daughter; civil liabilities modified to include exemplary damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 172321)

Charges

The allegations against the accused were formalized through two criminal informations. In Criminal Case No. 98-2304, he was charged with rape for an incident occurring on January 15, 1998, where he allegedly had carnal knowledge of AAA through intimidation and force. In Criminal Case No. 98-2305, he faced attempted rape charges stemming from an incident on January 22, 1998, characterized by his attempt to engage in carnal knowledge but which did not complete the act.

Evidence of the Prosecution

AAA testified that she was sexually assaulted by her father while sleeping in the same room as her siblings. On January 15, she was awakened when he undressed her while brandishing a bladed weapon and subsequently assaulted her. This was not an isolated occurrence; AAA recounted earlier incidents of abuse dating back to 1992. On January 22, a similar scenario unfolded, where AAA was again attempted to be sexually assaulted. Under duress, she managed to avoid further harm by hiding under a bed.

Evidence of the Defense

In his defense, the accused denied the allegations, claiming AAA had left home on the night of January 15 and argued that prior sexual encounters with other individuals negated her claims of being a virgin. He stated that the conflicts with AAA stemmed from other family dynamics, including disciplinary actions and miscommunication.

RTC Decision

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted the accused on March 24, 1999, imposing the death penalty for rape and a lower sentence for attempted rape, as well as ordering him to pay civil indemnity and moral damages to AAA.

CA Decision on Appeal

The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals, which modified the RTC's ruling. The CA affirmed the conviction for simple rape but corrected the penalty to reclusion perpetua, citing the absence of qualifying circumstances in the information. In regard to the attempted rape charge, the CA concluded that the evidence supported a conviction for acts of lasciviousness instead, as the accused's actions did not demonstrate the necessary intent for attempted rape.

Ruling of the Court

The Court upheld the CA's findings, reaffirming the convictions but also emphasizing the procedural requirement that requires qualifying circumstances to be explicitly stated in the information related to the offense. This led to the proper classification of the offenses against the accused.

Criminal Liabilities

The Court recognized the reliability and consistency of AAA's testimony, affirming that her sincere disclosure of abuse warranted credibility. The failure to specify the relationship in the charge for Criminal Case No. 98-2304 disallowed a verdict of qualified rape but allowed for a conviction of simple rape.

Legal Analysis of Attempted Rape vs. Acts of Lasciviousness

The Court took note of a mischaracterization in the RTC’s findings regarding the second incident, clarifying that the acts committed by the accused fell under acts of lasciviousness rather than attempted rape. The difference hinges on the intent and motivation of the accused's actions,

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.