1 Domingo was sentenced to suffer penalty of reclusion perpetua.
The trial court also awarded P50,000 as civil indemnity and
PEOPLE VS. DOMINGO
Nachura [November 23, 2007]
SUMMARY: Domingo was convicted of statutory rape of an 11-year old girl
by the trial court. The trial court awarded P50,000 as civil indemnity and
P50,000 as moral damages. The Supreme Court held that the trial court
rightly awarded civil indemnity and moral damages but failed to award
exemplary damages. It cited the case of People v. Malones which noted
that this is not the first time that a child has been snatched from the
cradle of innocence by some beast to sate its deviant sexual appetite.
To curb this disturbing trend, appellant should, likewise, be made to
pay exemplary damages which is pegged at P25,000.00.
FACTS:
Sometime in 1997: AAA, then 10 years old (11 years old
indicated in the Informations), was sleeping on the sofa of their
living room. She was awakened by accused Domingo, son of AAAs
maid, and was told to transfer to her bed. While inside the room,
she was asked to remove her shorts, then Domingo subsequently
inserted his penis into her private organ. He warned her not to tell
anybody; otherwise, something bad would happen to her.
The rape incident was repeated sometime in Februrary 1998.
BBB, the mother of AAA, found out that there was a stain in AAAs
panty. She brought AAA to the medico-legal office for examination.
The examination revealed that AAAs vagina had fresh lacerations.
Domingo was charged with two counts of rape. His defense was
that AAA fell in love with him, and that he received love letters from
her.
The trial court acquitted appellant of the first count of rape because
of the defect in the information as to the time of the commission of
the offense (sometime in 1997). As to the second count of rape,
the trial court convicted Domingo of statutory rape, considering
the age of the victim.
P50,000 as moral damages.
CA affirmed trial courts decision.
ISSUE/S AND RULING:
1. W/N exemplary damages should also be awarded YES
On the civil aspect, the trial court rightly awarded P50,000.00
as civil indemnity and another P50,000.00 for moral damages,
but failed to award exemplary damages.
As held in People v. Malones, this is not the first time that
a child has been snatched from the cradle of innocence by
some beast to sate its deviant sexual appetite. To curb this
disturbing trend, appellant should, likewise, be made to
pay exemplary damages which is pegged at P25,000.00.
2. W/N Domingo should be acquitted for the alleged defect in the
Information NO
An information is valid as long as it distinctly states the
elements of the offense and the acts or omissions constitutive
thereof. The precise time or date of the commission of an
offense need not be alleged in the complaint or information,
unless it is an essential element of the crime charged. In rape,
it is not. The gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a
woman through force and intimidation. In fact, the precise time
when the rape takes place has no substantial bearing on its
commission. As such, the date or time need not be stated with
absolute accuracy. 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.
Appeal DENIED. CA Decision AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.