Title
People vs. Santos y Cruz
Case
G.R. No. L-44973
Decision Date
Nov 4, 1985
Accused, an escapee, pleaded guilty to raping a 10-year-old with a knife. SC reduced death penalty to reclusion perpetua, citing lack of final prior conviction under Article 160.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175350)

Facts of the Case

Ernesto Santos y Cruz was accused of committing rape against Erlita Francisco y Fernando, a ten-year-old girl. The verified complaint stated that he, while armed with a knife, took advantage of his superior strength to engage in carnal knowledge with the victim on July 21, 1976. Upon arraignment, the accused pleaded guilty to the charges. Despite his plea, the trial court received testimonies from several witnesses, including the victim, medical personnel, and investigating officers, confirming the commission of the crime.

Applicable Law

The relevant legal provisions include Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, which stipulates the penalties for rape, and Article 160, which pertains to the punishment of persons who commit a felony after previous convictions. According to Article 335, the penalty for rape under the circumstances outlined is either reclusion perpetua or death.

Trial Court's Decision and Sentence

Although Santos y Cruz pleaded guilty, he was sentenced to death. The trial court reasoned this was justified based on Article 160 of the Revised Penal Code, which prescribes the maximum penalty for individuals who commit a felony after having been convicted previously. The trial court asserted that Santos y Cruz was subject to this provision due to his status as an escapee from Davao Penal Colony at the time of the commission of the crime.

Arguments from the Defense

The appellant's counsel argued that Article 160 should not apply because, as an escapee, Santos y Cruz was not "serving" his previous sentence. They contended that the guilty plea should have resulted in a penalty of reclusion perpetua, rather than death. The defense emphasized that there was no indication in the records that Santos y Cruz had been convicted by final judgment prior to the incident.

Court's Analysis and Conclusion

The Supreme Court addressed the argument surrounding Article 160, clarifying that a conviction by final judgment is a prerequisite for its application. The Court concluded that since there was no evidence that Santos y Cruz had been convicted before committing the rape, the conditions for the application of Article 160 were not met. Furthermore, it emphasized that being an escapee did not equate to the serving of a sentence.

Modification of Sentence

As a result of the findings, the Supreme Court modif

...continue reading

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