GR 137269; (October, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 137269 . October 13, 2000.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MULLER BALDINO, accused-appellant.
FACTS
The accused-appellant, Muller Baldino, was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Baguio City of the rape of his thirteen-year-old sister-in-law, Abrelinda Silam, and was sentenced to death. The Information alleged that on March 4, 1998, in Baguio City, Baldino had carnal knowledge of the minor complainant through force and intimidation. The prosecution established that the victim was staying at her sister’s house and was requested by Baldino’s wife to spend the night at their nearby house to care for the children. That night, Baldino grabbed her, removed her clothing, and had sexual intercourse with her despite her resistance and shouts for help. The victim immediately reported the rape. A medical examination revealed old-healed hymenal lacerations consistent with her account of a prior rape by the accused in 1997.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court correctly convicted the accused-appellant of qualified rape punishable by death, considering the allegations in the Information.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court ruled that the trial court erred in convicting Baldino of qualified rape and imposing the death penalty. While the evidence proved that Baldino was the husband of the victim’s elder sister, making him a relative by affinity within the third civil degree, this qualifying circumstance was not alleged in the Information. Under prevailing jurisprudence, qualifying circumstances that increase the penalty to death must be specifically pleaded in the indictment. Convicting an accused of the qualified offense when it was not charged constitutes a denial of the right to be informed of the accusation and a violation of due process. Consequently, the crime committed is simple rape, with the relationship considered only as a generic aggravating circumstance. The proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. The awards of civil indemnity and moral damages were affirmed, and exemplary damages were additionally granted due to the aggravating circumstance of relationship.