Civil Procedure Case Digest

People v. Perez 397 SCRA Facts: Appellant was charged with the crime of rape for ravishing a 6-year old girl. At pretrial, the prosecution and defense some facts including the age of the victim and her birth certificate was presented as evidence. He was later convicted and was punished to death by the RTC. In his reply brief, appellant maintains that the death penalty cannot be imposed on him for failure of the prosecution to prove victims age by independent evidence. Appellant points out that while the birth certificate was duly marked during pre-trial, it was not presented during the trial. Appellant assert that minority must not specifically alleged in the information but must also be established beyond reasonable doubt during the trial. Issue: Whether the minority must still be established in the trial beyond reasonable doubt. Held: At the pre-trial, the parties mutually worked out a satisfactory disposition of the criminal case. Appellant, assisted by counsel signed a pre-trial agreement stating that the victim is Maria, born May 23 as evidenced by her birth certificate. During the pretrial, the prosecution marked in evidence the birth certificate, it was submitted in its offer of evidence and RTC admitted without objection from defense. The purpose of the pre-trial is to consider the following: a) plea bargaining; b) stipulation of facts; c) marking for identification of evidence; d)waiver of objection to admissibility of evidence; e) modification of order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interpose lawful defense; f) such matter as will promote a fair and expedite the trial. Facts stipulated and evidence admitted during pre-trial binds the parties. After the pretrial conference, the trial court will issue and order reciting the action taken, facts stipulated and evidence marked. Such order shall bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of and control the course of trial, unless modified by the court to prevent manifest injustice.
Manuel Rodriguez II FEU Institute of Law

Civil Procedure Case Digest

Perezs contention is untenable.

Manuel Rodriguez II FEU Institute of Law