GR 121906; (April, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 121906 ; April 5, 2000
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FELIPE DELOS SANTOS, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Felipe delos Santos was convicted of rape and sentenced to death by the Regional Trial Court, a judgment affirmed by the Supreme Court on September 17, 1998. The conviction was based on the rape of his stepdaughter, Nhanette delos Santos, on September 12, 1994. Following finality of the judgment, delos Santos filed a motion to re-open the case, seeking a reduction of his penalty from death to reclusion perpetua.
He anchored his motion on the precedent set in People v. Garcia and subsequent cases, arguing that the Information filed against him failed to allege his specific relationship to the victim as her stepfather. He contended that this relationship, being a qualifying circumstance under Republic Act No. 7659 that would mandate the death penalty, must be expressly pleaded in the charge.
ISSUE
Whether the penalty imposed on the accused-appellant should be reduced from death to reclusion perpetua due to the prosecution’s failure to allege his relationship to the victim as a qualifying circumstance in the Information.
RULING
The Supreme Court granted the motion and reduced the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The Court held that the circumstances under R.A. 7659 which mandate the imposition of the death penalty are qualifying in nature. As such, they must be specifically and accurately alleged in the Information to afford the accused the right to be properly informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.
The Information in this case only charged the accused with simple rape, detailing the acts of force and carnal knowledge but omitting any allegation that he was the stepfather of the victim. This omission was fatal. Since the qualifying circumstance was not properly pleaded, it could not be used to justify the imposition of the death penalty, even if such relationship was subsequently proven during the trial. The penalty must therefore be that prescribed for simple rape, which is reclusion perpetua.
Furthermore, the Court ruled that the doctrine established in People v. Garcia must be applied retroactively in favor of the accused-appellant. Pursuant to Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, penal laws that are favorable to the accused who is not a habitual criminal shall be given retroactive effect. The Garcia ruling, having become part of the legal system, qualifies as such a favorable jurisprudential rule. Consequently, the Court modified its prior decision, imposing reclusion perpetua and awarding damages to the victim.