Flores was found guilty of raping his 13-year-old stepdaughter AAA. The prosecution presented witnesses including the victim, her mother, and the examining physician. Flores claimed AAA was his live-in partner of 4 years and sex was consensual. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court also affirmed finding Flores guilty of qualified rape given the crime occurred in the presence of AAA's mother, warranting the penalty of death even if AAA's age was not conclusively proven. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua instead of death.
Flores was found guilty of raping his 13-year-old stepdaughter AAA. The prosecution presented witnesses including the victim, her mother, and the examining physician. Flores claimed AAA was his live-in partner of 4 years and sex was consensual. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court also affirmed finding Flores guilty of qualified rape given the crime occurred in the presence of AAA's mother, warranting the penalty of death even if AAA's age was not conclusively proven. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua instead of death.
Flores was found guilty of raping his 13-year-old stepdaughter AAA. The prosecution presented witnesses including the victim, her mother, and the examining physician. Flores claimed AAA was his live-in partner of 4 years and sex was consensual. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court also affirmed finding Flores guilty of qualified rape given the crime occurred in the presence of AAA's mother, warranting the penalty of death even if AAA's age was not conclusively proven. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua instead of death.
Flores was found guilty of raping his 13-year-old stepdaughter AAA. The prosecution presented witnesses including the victim, her mother, and the examining physician. Flores claimed AAA was his live-in partner of 4 years and sex was consensual. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court also affirmed finding Flores guilty of qualified rape given the crime occurred in the presence of AAA's mother, warranting the penalty of death even if AAA's age was not conclusively proven. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua instead of death.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1
1.
Rape – PP vs Montano Flores (Sweetheart Theory)
Flores (F) submits on SC to review the decision of the CA which affirmed in toto the decision of RTC – Quezon City which found him guilty of Qualified Rape (Art. 266-A) and imposed him the penalty of death plus damages.
Information on Rape: F, with lewd designs, armed with bladed weapon, with “F,T,I” did there and then “W,F,U” have carnal knowledge with AAA, a minor, 13 years old, in full view of her mother. F is AAA’s step father being the common law spouse of BBB (AAA’s mother).
Prosecution was able to present three witnesses, accordingly:
1st Witness: Dr. Purita Tullas: Labia minora was slightly swollen and reddish which means there was forceful penetration and lacerations could have been inflicted within 24 hrs before examination. Further, it could be AAA’s first sexual experience as she felt pain when examined. 2nd Witness: BBB, victim’s mother: F ordered her to ask AAA to sleep with them to which they fearfully obliged. BBB was awakened by the pinch of her daughter, and was shocked to see that F was already on top of AAA. BBB could not do anything because a bladed weapon was poked on her neck. They reported to the barangay officials the following day. 3rd Witness: AAA: On that night, she was sleeping BBB and F. She was awakened by F who removed her shorts and panty and had carnal knowledge with her. She shouted in pain and tried to awaken her mother who was helpless because of the blade that was pointed at her.
Defense of F: AAA was not a minor but rather his live-in partner for 4 years. What happened that night was actually their first time to have sexual intercourse and it was him who was awakened to find AAA on top of him. Also, BBB wanted him for herself.
CA affirmed in toto the decision of RTC but in lieu of death penalty, imposed upon him Reclusion Perpertua.
I: w/n the trial court gravely erred in imposing upon him the penalty of death for failure of prosecution to prove AAA’s minority?
H: No. While prosecution did fail to prove AAA’s minority (failed to present her birth certificate and contradicting statements of the victim’s mother), F still cannot escape the penalty of death because aside from AAA’s minority, the qualifying circumstance that the crime of rape was committed in full view of the mother was also alleged in the information. Under Art 266-B, when rape is committed in full view of parent, the penalty to be imposed is death.
SC affirmed with modification the decision of CA and charged F guilty beyond reasonable doubt the crime of Qualified Rape and imposed upon him the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua, in lieu of death, without eligibility for parole plus damages (civil indemnity, moral and exemplary).
