Otherwise he would be deprived of his constitutional right to be properly

Otherwise he would be deprived of his constitutional

This preview shows page 35 - 37 out of 68 pages.

be convicted of qualified rape. Otherwise, he would be deprived of his constitutional right to be properly informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him since the information merely charges him with simple rape. People vs Caliso GR 131475 On appeal is the decision of the Regional Trial Court convicting appellant Benigno V. Villanueva of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. Whether the failure of OSG to alleged in their information the aggravating circumstances would bar imposition of death penalty against the petitioner. Decide. Answer: Yes, In this case, the information for rape shows that none of the aggravating circumstances mentioned by the OSG was expressly alleged. A court is precluded from considering the attendance of qualifying or aggravating circumstances if they are not alleged in the complaint or information. Thus, we find that the trial court did not err in sentencing appellant to the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua. People vs Buada Accused-appellant was charged with two counts of rape in two separate Informations by his daughters, Accordingly, accused was sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in Criminal Case 1 and death sentence in Criminal Case 2 and to indemnify the two victims. Was the trial court is correct when they imposed the death penalty? Answer: Yes, the information filed failed to indicate the relationship and minority, It is fundamental that every element of an offense must be alleged in the complaint or information. The purpose of the rule is to enable the accused to suitably prepare his defense. He is presumed to have no independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. The conviction of an accused of a crime in its qualified form, where the information failed to specify the circumstance that qualified the crime, is a denial of his right to be informed of the nature of the accusation against him and, consequently, a denial of due process. As stated above, the information in this case only alleged the offenders relationship to the victim but failed to mention the victims minority. Consequently, accused-appellant can only be held liable for simple rape, for which the penalty prescribed is reclusion perpetua. People vs Alemania The above-named accused, with lewd design and thru force and intimidation and with intent to satisfy his lust, did then and there willfully,
Image of page 35
unlawfully and feloniously insert his penis into the mouth of his daughter who was 6 years old, against her will and consent. Was the Trial court wrong in its decision to imposed death? Answer: Yes, It would be a denial of appellants constitutional right to be informed of the charges against him and, consequently, a denial of due process if he is charged with rape under paragraph 2 of Article 266-A and be convicted of the qualified form under paragraph 1 which is punishable with death although the same was not alleged in the indictment on which he was arraigned.
Image of page 36
Image of page 37

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture