You are on page 1of 2

9. PEOPLE v. NAAG G.R. No.

136394 February 15, 2001 license to the hospital and Desiree confirmed that Naag was the man who raped
Puno ,J. and robbed her. Desiree also identified Naags tricycle and thus, a criminal
complaint was filed.
At 4am, Desiree Gollena rode a tricycle driven by the accused, Herson Naag. Trial court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery and rape.

When they reached her house and Desiree was paying the fare, the driver WON the accused is guilty of robbery and rape?
slapped her and began to maul her. Desiree tried to fight back but the accused Held: NO. He is guilty of rape and theft.
became more ferocious. He strangled her, kicked her, boxed her, and
repeatedly stabbed her with a screw driver on her face, head and different parts It is intent that determines the offense committed
of her body. People vs. Dinola: x x x if the intention of the accused was to rob, but rape was
committed even before the asportation, the crime is robbery with rape. But if
During the struggle, Desiree banged her head against the sidecar and, realizing the original plan was to rape but the accused after committing the rape also
that fighting back would put her life in greater danger, she pretended to be committed the robbery when the opportunity presented itself, the offense
dead. should be viewed as separate and distinct. To be liable for the complex crime of
robbery with rape the intent to take personal property of another must precede
The accused brought her to an abandoned house, tossed her to the ground, the rape.
removed her pants and panties and copulated with her. After satisfying his lust,
he took her personal belongings (one bag containing clothes worth P500, one A0294 of the RPC does not distinguish whether rape was committed before,
gold bracelet worth P15,000 , a wallet containing P1,800 and a wristwatch valued during or after the robbery. It suffices that robbery was accompanied by rape.
at P600) and left.
Rape was the primary intent of NAAG; Overt acts indicate that he decided to take
Desiree, who could barely stand, crawled and reached the house of Engineer Desirees belongings as an afterthought and only when the opportunity
Antonio Balacano. She was then brought to the Albay Provincial Hospital. presented itself
! Dr. Jose Solano claimed that during his examination, the victim was in pain; she
sustained multiple laceration and stab wounds on different parts of her body, Looking at the degree and character of the violence and intimidation employed
and had blackening of her left and right eyes by Naag, the force was unnecessary if he only planned to rob Desiree. The
! Dr. Aileen Bartilet examined Desirees genitals and found no signs of any injury: excessive force was to attain his lustful scheme.
no bleeding, no laceration of the hymen, no contusion in the vulva wall of the The appellant transported Desiree from where he first mauled her to an
vagina and no abrasion abandoned place
! Desiree gave the police a description of the suspect and the tricycle All the time that Desiree was helpless after her mauling, appellant did
not concern himself with robbing Desiree even if he could have done so
Two days later, the police apprehended Naag for driving a public utility tricycle with ease if not with impunity.
without a license. He was preoccupied with finding a location more suited for his plan of
lying with her.
When he was brought to the police station, SPO1 Perena Jr. and SPO2 Mabini Naag did not ask for Desirees belongings nor searched her for valuables
found that Naag fit the description given by Desiree. They brought his drivers (except for the wallet). Watch and bracelet, both easily seen and
noticeable ; her bag, already in the tricycle

Guilty of theft
the element of violence & intimidation was no longer present when he
took her personal belongings
he inflicted force upon her person with the view and in pursuance of
rape, not of the taking
Desiree was near lifeless, incapable of putting any form of opposition


The accused--appellant is GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
RAPE. Penalty: RP, P50,000.00 as indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.

The accused--appellant is also GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the separate

crime of THEFT. Penalty: imprisonment of 4 months and 21 days of arresto
mayor maximum as the minimum, to 1 year, 8 months and 21 days of prision
correccional as the maximum

Ordered to return the ladies wristwatch worth P600.00, bracelet worth P1,500.00,
bag of clothes worth P500.00 or their total value of P2,600.00