Title
People vs. Nazareno
Case
G.R. No. 167756
Decision Date
Apr 9, 2008
A father, Jerry Nazareno, was convicted of repeatedly raping his two young daughters over several years, with the Supreme Court affirming his guilt and imposing life imprisonment without parole, alongside substantial damages.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. 167756)

Factual Background

The facts reveal a pattern of sexual abuse by Jerry Nazareno against his two minor daughters, AAA and BBB. The first incident involving AAA occurred in 1990 when she was merely seven years old, and the last incident of abuse against her was on March 25, 1996. BBB endured similar assaults starting in January 1992, with her last recorded abuse occurring on December 6, 1998. Throughout these years, Jerry Nazareno threatened both girls to ensure their silence about the abuse.

Charges and Proceedings

On March 17, 1999, Jerry Nazareno was indicted for multiple rapes under two separate informations: Criminal Case No. 2638 for BBB and Criminal Case No. 2650 for AAA. The informations alleged that the rapes were committed over extended periods — from January 1992 to December 6, 1998, for BBB, and from January 1990 to December 1998 for AAA.

Trial Court and Appellate Court Dispositions

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Nazareno on October 25, 2002, imposing the death penalty in both cases based on the provisions of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by R.A. 7659. The convictions were affirmed with modifications by the Court of Appeals (CA), increasing the civil indemnity to ₱75,000 while maintaining the moral damages amount.

Issues Raised on Appeal

Nazareno appealed on the grounds that the informations were defective for lacking specific dates concerning the alleged offenses. He contended this violated his right to be informed about the nature and cause of the accusations against him.

Court Ruling on the Informations

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the informations, stating that while it is important to provide dates, the precise specification was not critical due to the nature of the crime. The law requires that an information state the approximate time and date when the offense occurred, but it does not necessitate exact dates unless time is an essential element of the offense.

Conviction and Penalty

The court evaluated testimonies from AAA, BBB, their mother, and the medical doctor, which corroborated the charges against Nazareno. The credibility of the victims' testimonies was deemed sufficient for a conviction, as consistency and details substantiated their claims. However, the Supreme Court found that both the RTC and CA erred in categorizing these as multiple rapes due to the lack of detailed proof f

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.