GR No 182239

People of the Philippines vs Hermie Jacinto

GR No 182239        March 16, 2011

Facts:

Jacinto was charged of the crime of rape for having a carnal knowledge of AAA, who was five years old at the time, thus, with a qualifying/aggravating circumstance of minority. Jacinto entered a plea of not guilty by having defenses of denial and alibi. However, the RTC held Jacinto guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentences him to death. Thereafter, the trial was reopened as there was a newly-discovered evidence showing that Jacinto was only 17 years old at the time of the commission of the crime. RTC then amended the sentence to reclusion perpetual.

When appealed to CA, the RTC decision was affirmed but with modifications as to the sentence. Jacinto was adjudged to suffer the Indeterminate penalty of 6 years and 1 day to 12 years of prision mayor as minimum, to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal as maximum.

Issue:

          WON Jacinto may benefit from RA 9344 as he already exceeded the age of 21 upon conviction.

Held:

          The SC sustains the CA judgment of conviction. CA considered RA No 9344 despite the commission of the crime 3 years before the law was enacted on April 28, 2006. It is only right for the court to recognize its retroactive application.

          Section 6 of RA No 9344 exempts a child above 15 years but below 18 years of age from criminal liability, unless the child is found to have acted with discernment, in which case, “the appropriate proceedings” in accordance with the Act shall be observed. In the present case, indications that Jacinto acted with discernment are present. Nonetheless, the corresponding imposable penalty should be modified.

          The birth certificate of AAA showed her date of birth which makes her only 5 years old when Jacinto defiled her, and the law prescribing the death penalty when rape is committed against a child below 7 years old applies. Although, the following calls for the reduction of the penalty: 1) prohibition against death penalty under RA No 9344, and 2) the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority of Jacinto which has the effect of reducing the penalty one degree lower than that prescribed by law, pursuant to Art 68 of the RPC. It relied on a case wherein death was excluded from the graduation of penalties in appreciating the mitigating circumstance of minority.

         However, SC held that under Article 68 of RPC, when the offender is a minor under 18 years, the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in the proper period. However, for purposes of determining the proper penalty because of the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority, the penalty of death is still the penalty to be reckoned with. Thus, the proper imposable penalty for Jacinto is reclusion perpetua.