People v. Ching | G.R. No. 177150 | November 22, 2007 | CHICO-NAZARIO
| Art 3 - Sec. 12 |
Petitioners:
People of the Philippines
Respondents:
William Ching
Recit Ready Summary
Ching was convicted of 3 counts of rape committed against his minor daughter, AAA. The first time was sometime in 1996,
Ching instructed AAA to go inside his bedroom, he got on top of her and had carnal knowledge of her. She felt pain but could
not move because he held both her hands above her head and threatened to kill her. The second time was in May 1998,
while AAA and her siblings were sleeping on the floor. He put himself on top of her and had carnal knowledge of AAA. She
did not shout because Ching threatened to kill her. The third time was another evening in May 1998, while AAA and her
siblings were sleeping, Ching pulled her left arm, made her face him, then he had carnal knowledge of her. He warned her not
to tell anyone or he would kill her.
The issue is W/N the informations charging Ching of rape are sufficient to support a judgement of conviction. The
Court ruled YES. Section 11, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that it is not necessary to state in
the information the precise date the offense was committed, except when it is a material ingredient of the offense. The Court
has upheld complaints and informations in prosecutions for rape which merely alleged the month and year (or just the year) of
its commission. There is no reason to deviate from these precedents especially so that all the essential elements of rape were
also stated in the informations. Hence, the allegations in the informations which stated that the three incidents of rape were
committed in the year 1996 and May 1998 are sufficient to affirm the conviction.
FACTS:
1. Ching was convicted of 3 counts of rape committed against his minor daughter, AAA.
a. 1st time: Sometime in 1996, at around 5:00 PM, she and her younger siblings were left at the house with Ching,
while her mom was buying food. AAA was cooking rice, then Ching instructed her to go inside his bedroom. He
ordered her to lie down on the cemented floor, placed himself on top of her, then removed her shorts and her
panty. She screamed and resisted, but it was to no avail because he pressed his feet against hers. He then had
carnal knowledge of AAA. She felt pain but could not move because he held both her hands above her head and
threatened to kill her.
b. 2nd time: One evening in May 1998, AAA and her siblings were sleeping on the floor when Ching pulled her left
arm and made her lie in a straight body position. He put himself on top of her and had carnal knowledge of AAA.
She did not shout because appellant threatened to kill her. After, he stood up and threatened to kill her if she told
anyone.
c. 3rd time: In the evening of May 1998, while AAA and her siblings were sleeping, appellant pulled her left arm and
made her face him. He placed himself on top of her, removed her shorts and panty, then had carnal knowledge of
her. After, he warned her not to tell anyone or he would kill her.
2. (Extra Info) Ching was subsequently arrested and detained for drug pushing. In the meantime, AAA was employed as a
house helper. After Ching was released, he would go to AAA’s employer’s house demanding money and creating a
scene when she refused to give him any money. Fed up, AAA went to the barangay hall to report the commotion and
the several times Ching raped her.
ISSUES: W/N the informations charging Ching of rape are sufficient to support a judgement of conviction? Yes
HELD:
- An information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with
the court.
- To be considered as valid and sufficient, an information must:
a. State the name of the accused
b. Designation of the offense give by statute
c. Acts/omissions complained of as constituting the offense
d. Name of the offended party
e. Approximate date of the commission of the offense
f. Place where it was committed
- Section 11, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that it is not necessary to state in the
information the precise date the offense was committed, except when it is a material ingredient of the offense.
- In rape cases, the date or time of the commission of rape is not a material ingredient because the gravamen of rape is
carnal knowledge of a woman through force and intimidation. It is sufficient that the complaint or information states that
the crime has been committed at any time as near as possible to the date of its actual commission.
- The Court has upheld complaints and informations in prosecutions for rape which merely alleged the month and year (or
just the year) of its commission. There is no reason to deviate from these precedents especially so that all the essential
elements of rape were also stated in the informations. Hence, the allegations in the informations which stated that the
three incidents of rape were committed in the year 1996 and May 1998 are sufficient to affirm the conviction.
- (Side issue) As for the penalty, the law applicable in 1996 was RA 7659 and in 1998 was the Anti-Rape Law of 1997.
Both laws state that the death penalty shall be imposed if the rape victim is a minor and the offender is a parent. The
best evidence to prove age is an original or certified true copy of the certificate of live birth. However, in the case at bar,
the prosecution was not able to present the birth certificate of AAA because according to her mom, she was not
registered with the appropriate government agencies. Thus, in its absence, similar authentic documents, such as a
baptismal certificate, which show the date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove age. According to AAA’s baptismal
certificate, she was about 13 years old when she was raped in 1996, and 14 years old and 9 months when she was
twice raped in May 1998.
DISPOSITION: CA decision AFFIRMED.
Comments
Post a Comment