People v. Taroy (2011)

 

People of the Philippines v. Taroy G.R. No. 192466 September 7, 211 T!"R# #"$"S"%N &'(TS) Mila is Taroy Mila aroy’s ’s wi wife fe.. Mila has an elde eldest st dau daught ghter er ffrom rom h her er  rst rst marri marriage age nam named ed Des. The couple lived with Mila’s children in Benguet at the boundary of  Baguio City City.. According to Des when she was still !" years old Taroy raped her when she was alone cleaning their house. #he was told not to tell anyone lest Mila and her siblings would su$er harm. This incident was followed by another se%ual abuse on the ne%t year. This time it occurred inside Des’ bedroom where  T  Taroy aroy pointed a &nife at her and order ordered ed her to undress and submit to his se%ual desires. Des only conded the story to her mother and aunt four years later. They acco ac comp mpani anied ed he herr to the the 'B 'B(( to co comp mpla lain in.. #h #he e al also so un unde derw rwen entt me medi dica call e%a %ami minat natio ion n wh wher ere e itcaused wa was s rev evea led dinsertion that that ther there wa was s in inde deed ed a The hi hist stor ory y of  previous blunt force byeale an ofean erect penis. public prosecutor charged Taroy with two counts of before the )TC of *a Trinidad Bengue Ben guet. t. Cor Corre respo spondi ndingl ngly y the )TC con convic victed ted Tar aroy oy of the o$e o$ense nse and penali+ed him to su$er reclusion perpetua. perpetua.  T  Taroy aroy challenged the Benguet )TC’s ,urisdiction over the crimes charged contending that their residence where the alleged o$enses too& place was at the boundary of Baguio City.  The )TC held however that Taroy’s testimony that their residence was in Baguio City did not strip the court of its ,urisdiction since he waived the  ,urisdictional re-uirement. The Court of Appeals armed the decision of the )TC. (t held that the prosecution has suciently established the ,urisdiction of the )TC. /ence this appeal.

"SS*+) 0hether or not the )TC of *a Trinidad Benguet has ,urisdiction to hear the rape cases against Taroy.

R*"NG) 1 en enue ue is to ,u ,uri risd sdic icti tiona onall The in crim crright imin inal al ca case ses. s. (t e%ist ca can n as ne neit ithe her r be of wa waiv ived edThus no norr sub,ected stipulation. venue must a matter law.

 

for territorial ,urisdiction to attach the criminal action must be instituted and tried in the proper court of the municipality city or province where the o$ense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients too& place.  The information led with the )TC of *a Trinidad state that the crimes were commit com mitted ted in the vic victim tim and the o$e o$ende nder’s r’s hou house se in Cit City y *im *imit it Tudi uding ng Muni Mu nici cipa pali lity ty of (tog (togon on 2rov 2rovin ince ce of Be Beng ngue uet. t. Th This is al alle legat gatio ion n co confe nferr rred ed territorial ,urisdiction over the sub,ect o$enses on the )TC of *a Trinidad Benguet. The testimonies of Mila and Des as well as the adavit of arrest point to this fact. Clearly Taroy’s uncorroborated assertion that the sub,ect o$en o$ ense ses s too& too& pl plac ace e in Ba Bagu guio io City City is no nott en enti titl tled ed to be beli lief ef.. Be Besi side des s he admitted during the pre3trial in the case that it was the )TC of *a Trinidad that that ha had d ,uri ,urisd sdic icti tion on to he hear ar the the ca case se.. Ta& a&en en al alto toge geth ther er that that )TC’ C’s s  ,urisdiction to hear the case case is beyond dispute.