TINGKAHAN

CASE NO. 1359.

People v. Traya
Article III, Sec. 14: Absence of qualifying circumstance

FACTS: The accused raped he victim (16 yo) who raped which resulted to the latter’s pregnancy. The
accused is the father of the victim. An information was filed against the accused for the crime of rape. The
fact of the minority of the victim was not stated in the Information. Only the relationship of the victim as the
daughter of the offender was alleged therein. Nevertheless, the trial court meted accused-appellant the
extreme penalty of death under Republic Act 7659 which provides that the death penalty shall be imposed
if the crime of rape is committed by a parent against his child who was under eighteen years (18) of age
at the time of the assault.

ISSUE: Whether or not the absence of the allegation of minority in the information is fatal in the imposition
of the death penalty.

RULING: Yes. The rule is that the elements of minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender
must concur (for death penalty). The failure to allege one of these elements precludes the imposition of
the death penalty. There being no allegation of the minority of the victim in the Information, he cannot be
convicted of qualified rape as he was not properly informed that he is being accused of qualified rape. It is
fundamental rule that every element of the crime charged must be alleged in the Information.

MAIN POINT: All elements of the crime (including the qualifying circumstances) must be alleged in the
information.

TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1360.
People v. Mamac
Article III, Sec. 14: Absence of qualifying circumstance

FACTS: In two informations, Modesto C. Mamac was accused of raping Bernadette U. Enguito on two
separate occasions. Appellant allegedly used a bolo to threaten the victim. Moreover, Bernadette was
only sixteen (16) years of age at the time of the sexual attack. Nonetheless, in a police complaint,
Bernadette referred to appellant as her grandfather (considered by the trial court as a stepgrandfather). A
reading of the information will reveal that appellant was only charged with simple rape under the first
circumstance provided in Article 335. The information does not contain any allegation of relationship and
minority nor the use of a deadly weapon. Even so, the trial court imposed the penalty of death upon
appellant (rape with the use of a deadly weapon and the rape of a minor by a relative were recognized as
qualified rape – penalty of death).

ISSUE: Whether or not the absence of the qualifying circumstance in the Information made the imposition
of death penalty improper.

RULING/MAIN POINT: Yes. The information does not charge appellant with qualified rape and he cannot
be sentenced to death. We have held that the concurrence of the minority of the victim and her
relationship to the offender is a special qualifying circumstance which should be alleged in the information
to warrant imposition of the death penalty. Minority and relationship are treated as special qualifying
circumstances and not, merely as aggravating circumstances because they increase the
imposable penalties by degrees. Unlike a generic aggravating circumstance which may be proved
even if not alleged, a qualifying aggravating cannot be proved as such unless alleged in the
information. It must be properly pleaded in order not to violate the constitutional right of the
accused to be properly informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him . Needless to
state, appellant will be denied due process if after being charged with simple rape, he is convicted of its
qualified form punishable with death.
TINGKHANA
CASE NO. 1361.
People v. Decena
Article III, Sec. 14: Absence of qualifying circumstance

FACTS: The daughter of the victim saw appellant rushing towards her father with a long bladed weapon,
prompting Luzviminda to warn her father to run for safety. Instead, Jaime simply raised his hand, thus
allowing appellant to stab him on the right chest just below the nipple. Hence, the attack was sudden.
Judgment was rendered by the trial court convicting him of murder, imposing on him the penalty of
reclusion perpetua. The qualifying circumstances of treachery was considered by the trial court.

ISSUE: Whether or not the qualifying circumstance needs to be detailed in order to be appreciated in a
criminal case.

RULING: Yes. The SC reject the trial court's holding that the killing of the victim was attended by
treachery. Any circumstance which would qualify a killing to murder must be proven as indubitably as the
crime itself. Here, the qualifying circumstance of treachery cannot be appreciated, for none of the
prosecution's arguments can uphold its allegation. It is true that the attack was sudden, but that fact per
se does not bespeak the circumstance of alevosia. It is further required that the means, methods or forms
were deliberated upon or consciously adopted by the offender. The crime committed, therefore, was
simple homicide.

MAIN POINT: Allegations must be complete as to the qualifying circumstances for the same to be
appreciated and to meet the requirement of one’s constitutional right to be informed.

TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1362.
People v. Lomibao
Article III, Sec. 14: Absence of qualifying circumstance

FACTS: An information for rape was filed against the accused with the victim mentioned to be 11 years
old at the time the alleged rape was committed. The accused-appellant claims that even assuming that
the trial court was correct in convicting him, the said court improperly relied on the qualifying circumstance
of relationship (accused is the stepfather of the victim) to convict him of qualified rape since said
circumstance was not alleged in the information.

ISSUE: Whether or not the trial court gravely erred in imposing the death penalty despite the absence of
any qualifying circumstances in the charge sheet.

RULING/MAIN POINT: Yes. The Court has consistently held that the concurrence of the minority of the
victim and her relationship with the offender is a special qualifying circumstance that must be both alleged
and proved with certainty, otherwise the death penalty cannot be imposed. Both special-qualifying
circumstances of minority and relationship must be alleged in the information. In the present case,
although the fact that MARISSA was only eleven (11) years old on the date of the commission of the rape
was alleged in the information and proved during trial, the fact that the accused-appellant was the
common-law spouse of MARISSAs mother was not alleged. Thus, even if it were proved that the
accused-appellant was the common law spouse of her mother, he can only be convicted of simple rape
under the second paragraph of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and should be sentenced to
reclusion perpetua.
TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1363.
People v. Canonigo
Art. III Sec. 14. Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: An information against Canonigo for the crime of rape was filed. Victim Carla was keeping watch
over her 5 month old sister when Canonigo went to her house and raped her. RTC found Canonigo guilty
and sentenced him to death penalty. Canonigo contends that TC erred in imposing the death penalty
since the information filed against him did not allege the qualifying circumstance that the rape was
committed in full view of a relative within the third degree of consanguinity of the victim.

Issue: W/N the penalty against him was improper for the failure of alleging the qualifying circumstance in
the information.

Ruling: YES. The attendant aggravating circumstance that the victim was raped in full view of a relative
within the third degree of consanguinity was not alleged in the information filed against the accused. The
Constitution guarantees the right of every person accused in a criminal prosecution to be
informed of the nature and the charge against him. Since the facts stated in the body of the
information determine the crime for which the accused stands charged and for which he must be tried,
every element of the criminal offense must be alleged in the complaint or information to enable the
accused to suitably prepare for his defense. (Main point in bold.)

TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1364.
People v. Cruz
Art. III Sec. 14. Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: Cruz arrived home heavily drunk then ordered his daughter, Vanessa, who was then sleeping to
enter the room, locked her, undressed her and then raped her. Vanessa was raped by her father again for
the second time. Then for the third time. Vanessa was accompanied by her grandmother to the NBI. Cruz
was arrested. RTC found him guilty of rape and sentenced to death penalty because the accused
committed the crime with the aggravating circumstance of relationship, the accused being the father of
herein complainant. Accused contends that the circumstance that the victim was a minor was not alleged
in the information.

Issue: W/N the charge against him was proper considering the fact of failure in alleging the minority of the
victim

Ruling: NO. It has been the rule that qualifying circumstances must be properly pleaded in the
indictment. If the same are not pleaded but proved, they shall be considered only as aggravating
circumstances. Despite the absence of allegation in each of the criminal complaints in these cases that
the private complainant was a minor or under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of each of the
crimes of rape, the TC erroneously imposed on the appellant the indivisible penalty of death in
violation of his right under Article III, Section 14 to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusations against him. Consequently, the appellant can be held liable for 3 counts of simple rape only
with penalty of reclusion perpetua. (Main point in bold.)
TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1365.
People v. Watimar
Art. III Sec. 14. Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: Information was filed against Fernando Watimar for the crime of rape. Myra Watimar, 20 y.o.
testified that one evening, she slept together with her brothers and sisters without her mother who went to
the hospital, her father, the accused slept with them in the same room. At early dawn, he proceeded to
threaten the victim and succeeded in having sexual intercourse against her will. Another incident
happened shortly thereafter; when the victim was again assaulted in their kitchen while she was preparing
her meals. Afterwards, she was threatened with a knife by her father not to tell anyone about the incident.
Considering that a deadly weapon was employed in the commission of the offenses charged in this case,
the imposable penalty ranges from reclusion perpetua to death. The use of the bladed weapon already
qualified the acts of rape.

Issue: W/N the penalty against him was improper for the failure of alleging the qualifying circumstance in
the information.

Ruling: NO. Record shows that none of the aggravating circumstances was alleged and proven by
the prosecution. Where there is no aggravating circumstance proved in the commission of the offense,
the lesser penalty shall be applied. While the employment of the knife was sufficiently established by
the prosecution, such clear showing cannot justify the imposition of the death penalty in the
absence of an aggravating circumstance. (Main point in bold.)

TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1266.
People v. Gabiana
Art. III Sec. 14. Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: Pedro Gabiana was charged with the rape of Rosemarie, then 10 y.o. Rosemarie is the eldest of
Rosalia, Pedro’s live-in partner. Pedro avers that the charge hurled against him was nothing but a
malicious fabrication of Rosemarie’s aunt, whose ulterior motive is to take custody of the complainant and
the latter’s sister. He was found guilty of rape qualified by the relationship of accused and the victim as he
is the common-law husband of the complainant’s mother and sentenced to death penalty. Pedro contends
the relationship was not alleged in the information.

Issue: W/N failure to allege the fact of relationship between the accused and the victim in the information
for rape is fatal and consequently, bars conviction of its qualified form which is punishable by death.

Ruling: YES. Although it was shown that the appellant is the common-law husband of the complainant’s
mother, it was not alleged in the Information under which appellant was arraigned. Qualifying
circumstances must be properly pleaded in the indictment in order not to violate the
constitutional right of the accused to be properly informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him. Accordingly, the death penalty imposed below on appellant should be reduced
to reclusion perpetua. (Main point in bold.)
TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1367.
People v. Banihit
Art. III Sec. 14. Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: Accused Banihit was convicted of raping his 9 y.o. niece, Glaiza Mae. One evening while Glaiza’s
mother was doing the laundry. Banihit arrived looking for victim’s father. The mother told him that he was
not home. Banihit asked for Glaiza and told her, "We will look for your father." They rode a motorcycle
and went to a grassy lot in a place where he undressed Glaiza and made her lie down on a big tire and
raped her. Banihit was found guilty of rape qualified by relationship to the victim. Banihit contends that the
relationship was not alleged in the information.

Issue: W/N the qualifying circumstances must be pleaded in the information.

Ruling: YES. When the attendant circumstances are special qualifying circumstances and not
ordinary aggravating circumstances which merely increase the period of the penalty, they must be
specifically pleaded or alleged with certainty in the information. However, the relationship to the
victim, while proven by competent evidence, was not sufficiently alleged in the information. (Main point in
bold.)

TINGKAHAN
CASE NO. 1368.
People v. Gutierrez
Art III: Section 14: Absence of Qualifying Circumstance

Facts: This is a consolidated case wherein the accused was charged with 2 counts of rape and
sentenced to death penalty hence this is an automatic review of the case. Joey Gutierrez was charged
with rape and violation of Section 10, Article VI of R.A. No. 7610, otherwise known as the Special
Protection of Children against Child Abuse for raping his 9 year old girl who was the child of his common
law wife. However the relationship was not alleged in the information.

Issue: W/N the constitutional right of the accused violated, when he was sentenced to death penalty
because the failure of to allege a qualifying circumstance in the information

Ruling: Yes. We have ruled in a number of cases that the circumstances provided for in the amendatory
provisions of Section 11 of R.A. No. 7659, the attendance of any of which would mandate the single
indivisible penalty of death prescribed in Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, are in the nature of
qualifying circumstances. Unlike a generic aggravating circumstance which may be proved even if not
alleged, a qualifying circumstance cannot be proved as such unless alleged in the Information although it
may, be proved as an ordinary aggravating circumstance if so included among those enumerated in
Article 14 of the Code.

Main Point: The circumstances provided for in the amendatory provisions of Section 11 of R.A.
No. 7659 are in the nature of qualifying circumstances