RA 7610 Doctrines

DOCTRINES (RA 7610) People of the Philippines v. Leonardo Degay | G.R. No. 182526 | August 25, 2010 | J. Perez Absence of hymenal lacerations on the private organs of the victims does not negate rape. It stressed that the RTC correctly convicted the accused of three counts of statutory rape since the accused had sexual intercourse with the victims who are both under 12 years of age. People of the Philippines v. Ernesto Fragrante | G.R. No. 182521 | February 09, 2011 | J. Carpio (1) When the victim is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period. (2) In crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness, relationship is considered aggravating." In that case, the Court considered relationship as an aggravating circumstance since the information mentioned, and the accused admitted, that the complainant is his daughter. In the instant case, the information expressly state that AAA is appellant's daughter, and appellant openly admitted this fact . People of the Philippines v. Bernabe Pangilinan | G.R. No.183090 | November 14, 2011 | J. Perez Under Section 5 (b), Article III of RA 7610 in relation to RA 8353, if the victim of sexual abuse is below 12 years of age, the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual abuse but for statutory rape under Article 266-A (1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code and penalized withreclusion perpetua. On the other hand, if the victim is 12 years or older, the offender should be charged with either sexual abuse under Section 5 (b) of RA 7610 or rape under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code. However, the offender cannot be accused of both crimes for the same act because his right against double jeopardy will be prejudiced. A person cannot be subjected twice to criminal liability for a single criminal act. Likewise, rape cannot be complexed with a violation of Section 5 (b) of RA 7610. Under Section 48 of the Revised Penal Code (on complex crimes), a felony under the Revised Penal Code (such as rape) cannot be complexed with an offense penalized by a special law. SPO1 Acuzar v. Jorolan and Hon. Apresa, People’s Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) | G.R. No. 177878 | April 7, 2010 | J. Villarama Jr. Misconduct generally means wrongful, improper or unlawful conduct, motivated by premeditated, obstinate or intentional purpose.It usually refers to transgression of some established and definite rule of action, where no discretion is left except what necessity may demand; it does not necessarily imply corruption or criminal intention but implies wrongful intention and not to mere error of judgment.

Jojit Garingarao v. People of the Philippines | G.R. No. 192760 | July 20, 2011 | J. Carpio In case of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused. A child is deemed subject to other sexual abuse when the child is the victim of lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence of any adult. It is inconsequential that sexual abuse under RA 7610 occurred only once. Section 3 (b) of RA 7610 provides that the abuse may be habitual or not. Hence, the fact that the offense occurred only once is enough to hold the accused liable for acts of lasciviousness under RA 7610. People of the Philippines v. Ireno Bonaagua y Berce | G.R. No. 188897 | June 06, 2011 | J. Peralta It must be emphasized, that like in the crime of rape whereby the slightest penetration of the male organ or even its slightest contact with the outer lip or the labia majora of the vagina already consummates the crime, in like manner, if the tongue, in an act of cunnilingus, touches the outer lip of the vagina, the act should also be considered as already consummating the crime of rape through sexual assault, not the crime of acts of lasciviousness. However, when the victim testifies that the accused only touched her private part and licked it, but did not insert his finger in her vagina, this testimony of the victim, however, is open to various interpretation, since it cannot be identified what specific part of the vagina was defiled by the accused. Thus, in conformity with the principle that the guilt of an accused must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, the statement cannot be the basis for convicting the accused with the crime of rape through sexual assault. If such act is committed against a victim who was 8 years old at the time of the commission of the crime, the accused shall be charged of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness under Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610.