‘THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,
vs. HON. LORENZO B. VENERACION, HENRY
LAGARTO y PETILLA and ERNESTO CORDERO,
respondents.
GR.Nos. 119987-88 October 12, 1995
FACTS:
The case arose from the conviction of two
individuals by the respondent judge with the
crime of Rape with Homicide of seven-year old
girl The accused on the incident also caused
fatal injuries to the minor child by slashing her
vagina, hitting her head with a thick peace of
‘wood and stabling her neck, which were all the
direct. cause of her immediate death.
Respondent-judge however, instead of,
imposing the corresponding death penalty,
imposed rather the reclusion perpetua to each
accused.
‘The City Prosecutor filed a Motion for
Reconsideration praying that the decision be
modified that the penalty be death instead of
reclusion perpetua. Respondent-judge still
denied the motion citing religious convictions.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the respondentjudge acted
with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction when he failed to
attach the corresponding penalty of the crime
of Rape with Homicide.
HELD:
Yes, respondent-judge clearly acted with grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess
of jurisdiction in the attaching the proper
corresponding penalty of the crime of Rape
with Homicide, The Supreme Court mandates
that after an adjudication of guilt, the judge
should impose the proper penalty provided for
by law on the accused regardless of his own
religious or moral beliefs. Respondent judge is
duty bound to emphasize that a court of law is
no place for a protracted debate on the
‘morality or propriety of the sentence, where
the law itself provides for the sentence of
death as penalty in specific and well defined
instances. The discomfort faced by those
forced by law to impose the death penalty is an
ancient one, but is a matter upon which judges
have no choice. This is consistent in the rule
laid down in the Civil Code Article 9, that no
judge or court shall dectine to render judgment
by reason of the silence, obscurity, or
insufficiency of the laws.
Thus, the petition was granted, the Court
remanded the case back to the respondent-
judge for the imposition of death penalty of the
accused.