Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Remiendo Vs People Digest

    Uploaded by

    Russell John Hipolito
    165 views2 pages
    The petitioner, Robert Remiendo, appealed his conviction of two counts of statutory rape of a minor, AAA, who was under 12 years old at the time of the offenses in 1997. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding that AAA's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence of healed hymenal lacerations. The Court also ruled that Remiendo, who was over 15 but under 18 at the time of the rapes, was not exempt from criminal liability as he had acted with discernment and was over 21 years old by the time of sentencing.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    29. Remiendo vs People Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner, Robert Remiendo, appealed his conviction of two counts of statutory rape of a minor, AAA, who was under 12 years old at the time of the offenses in 1997. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding that AAA's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence of healed hymenal lacerations. The Court also ruled that Remiendo, who was over 15 but under 18 at the time of the rapes, was not exempt from criminal liability as he had acted with discernment and was over 21 years old by the time of sentencing.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    165 views2 pages

    Remiendo Vs People Digest

    Uploaded by

    Russell John Hipolito
    The petitioner, Robert Remiendo, appealed his conviction of two counts of statutory rape of a minor, AAA, who was under 12 years old at the time of the offenses in 1997. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding that AAA's testimony was corroborated by medical evidence of healed hymenal lacerations. The Court also ruled that Remiendo, who was over 15 but under 18 at the time of the rapes, was not exempt from criminal liability as he had acted with discernment and was over 21 years old by the time of sentencing.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    ROBERT REMIENDO y SIBLAWAN, petitioner, vs.

    THEPEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent


    G.R. No. 184874
    October 9, 2009
    NACHURA, J.

    FACTS:

    PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals.

    The complainant [AAA] was born on 16 February 1986. At the time of the commission of the
    offense, she was a minor below 12years of age. She knew accused-appellant Robert Remiendo as he was
    residing near the house where her family used to stay. Sometime in March 1997, she was sexually
    assaulted by accused-appellant inside said house. On that day, her parents and brother left for work
    after breakfast, and she was left alone in the house. Accused-appellant came in, pushed her into the
    room, and raped her. The complainant struggled, moved, and pushed accused-appellant. She felt pain
    when accused-appellant inserted his penis into her vagina. She cried until accused-appellant left, but she
    did not shout because accused-appellant warned her not to, or else he would kick her. She put on her
    clothes after accused-appellant left. Her parents arrived in the afternoon but she did not tell them what
    happened to her because her mother might whip her.
    Sometime in May 1997, [AAA] was again sexually assaulted by accused-appellant, which took
    place in the house of the latter. At that time, she was on her way to see her mother at her workplace
    after she had lunch. When she passed by the house of accused-appellant, the latter pulled her into his
    house and brought her into his room. They were alone in the room. Accused-appellant removed his
    clothes and told her to remove her panty. Afraid, she removed her panty and was made to lie on the
    bed. Accused-appellant inserted his penis into her vagina and she felt pain. She kept on moving but she
    could not push away accused-appellant. She moved her shoulders and pushed accused-appellant with
    both hands but he was stronger. Afterwards, accused-appellant moved away and threatened to kill her if
    she told anyone what happened. She responded that she would not tell anyone. Later, she executed a
    sworn statement and identified accused-appellant as the person who raped her. AAA was examined by
    the NBI medico legal officer and confirmed the laceration of the hymen and the psychiatrist exam result
    showed that [AAA] is suffering from psychosis and organicity. The defense presented statements from
    classmates and teacher that AAA was a liar and unruly. October 27, 2004, the RTC found Remiendo
    guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two (2)counts of statutory rape. andhereby sentences him to suffer
    the penalty of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor , as minimum, to fourteen (14) years and
    one (1) day of reclusion temporal , as maximum for each count of rape. He shall further indemnify the
    offended party [AAA] the sum of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) by way of civil indemnity, the sum of
    Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) by way of moral damages, and the sum of Ten Thousand Pesos
    (P10,000.00) byway of exemplary damages. The CA affimed the decision and modified the damages.

    ISSUE:

    1. Whether or not the accused is guilty of the crime of rape?


    2. Whether or not the accused is exempted from criminal liability for he is above 15 and under
    18 years of age at the time of the rape?
    RULING:

    1. Yes, AAA’s testimony of rape was corroborated by the NBI medico-legal examination
    showing healed lacerations on her hymen. Hymenal lacerations, whether healed or fresh,
    are the best evidence of forcible defloration. When the consistent and forthright testimony
    of a rape victim is consistent with medical findings, there is sufficient basis to warrant a
    conclusion that the essential requisites of carnal knowledge have been established.
    2. No, Remiendo, being above 15 and under 18 years of age at the time of the rape, and
    having acted with discernment, but having already reached 21 years of age at the time of
    the imposition of his sentence by the trial court, his claim for the benefits of R.A. No. 9344 is
    rendered moot and academic.

    You might also like