U.S. vs.

Antonio Javier Dichao

G.R. no. 8781 March 30, 1914
Moreland, J.

Facts:

- An information was filed which accused one Antonio Javier Dichao of the crime of rape
perpetrated upon his 12 year-old step-daughter, Isabel de la Cruz. It alleged that “on or about and
during the interval between October 1910 to August 1912”, the accused, using threats and
corporal punishment, had carnal knowledge with the victim, which led to her becoming pregnant
and giving birth on August 5, 1912.
- A demurrer alleged that the information was too vague and ambiguous, and thus, did not conform
substantially to the prescribed form. The CFI (14 th judicial district) sustained the demurrer and
dismissed the case.

Issues/Held:

- SC: sustain the decision of the CFI.

o The allegations of an information should, if possible, be sufficiently explicit and certain
as to time to inform the accused of the date on which the crime is alleged to have been
committed; part of the defendant’s right to have the opportunity to defend himself.
- Where the exact date cannot be fixed, or where the prosecuting officer is thoroughly satisfied that
he cannot prove an exact date, he should allege on the information that the crime was committed
on or about a date named.
o He is not required to input a precise date later on, but may prove any date which is not so
remote as to surprise and prejudice the defendant.
- In the current case, the statement of the time when the crime was committed is so indefinite and
uncertain that it does not give the accused the Information required by law.
- Section 7 of Code of CrimPro: “to permit the allegation of a date of a commission of a crime as
near to the actual date as the information will permit, and when that has been done, any date may
be proved which does not surprise and substantially prejudice the defense.”
o But variance between estimated and actual date of the crime is not a means of acquittal;
the SC clarified that if such a variance occurs and the defendant is surprised thereby, and
that, by reason of that surprise, he is unable to defend himself properly, the Court may
order the information amended and set forth time for the defendant to be able to defend
himself once more.