FACTS: Petitioner was 15 years old when he raped a minor. He was convicted of rape and was imposed a penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua and a fine. He elevated the case to CA and during the pendency of the case, RA 9344 took effect. CA affirmed the conviction and denied the defense of minority since the age was not established by presenting the birth certificate but only alleged in the testimonial of the petitioner and his mother. According to them the burden of proof of age is upon the prosecution. ISSUES: 1. Who has the burden of proof in establishing the age of the accused? 2. Whether the law be given retroactive application. DECISION:
The instant petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated February
29, 2008 and Resolution dated May 22, 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R.-CR.-H.C. No. 02218 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Pursuant to Section 64 of R.A. No. 9344, Criminal Case No. 120292-H for rape filed against petitioner Robert Sierra y Caneda is hereby DISMISSED. The Supreme Court ordered for the immediate release of petitioner RATIO: 1. The duty to establish the age of the accused is not on the prosecution but on the accused. Age can be established by birth certificate. Sec. 7 provides that in the absence of such document, age may be based from the information of the child, testimonies of other persons, physical appearance and other relevant evidence. Also in case of doubt, minority should be in favour of the child. In the case at bar, minority was established by the testimonies of the petitioner and his mother. This was not objected by the prosecution and did not even presented contrary evidence. Thus, minority is established. 2. The law should be given retroactive application since this favors the accused as provided for in the Revised Penal Code penal laws favouring the accused should be given retroactive effect. Hence, the accused is considered a minor with an age of not above 15 years old. The case is dismissed and the petitioner is referred to the appropriate local social welfare.