Previous 7 / 7 Next

xxx [32] R.A. No. 7610, Article XII, Section 31. Common Penal Provisions. - xxxx (a) The penalty provided herein shall be imposed in its maximum period when the perpetrator is an ascendant, parent, guardian, stepparent or collateral relative within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity, or a manager or owner of an establishment which has no license to operate or its license has expired or has been revoked. [33] (f) A fine to be determined by the court shall be imposed and administered as a cash fund by the Department of Social Welfare and Development and disbursed for the rehabilitation of each child victim, or any immediate member of his family, if the latter is the perpetrator of the offense. [34] [35] People v. Noel Go Caoili alias "Boy Tagalog", G.R. Nos. 196342 and 196848, August 8, 2017. See Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Circular No. 799, Series of 2013, effective July 1, 2013, in Nacar v. Gallery Frames, et al., 116 Phil. 267 (2013).

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

People v. Ursua

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 218575

Division: PH Supreme Court Second Division

Date of decision: Oct 4, 2017

Year of decision: 2017

GBV Case Type

Child Abuse (R.A. 7610)
Child Rape
Incest
Minor
Rape

Nature of the case: The father of the 14-year-old victim, sexually abused the latter and had carnal knowledge with the same against the latter’s will in Pasig City. Charges against the accused were filed for qualified rape. According to the Court’s findings, the denial of the accused cannot overcome the positive testimony of the victim. She was spontaneous and credible as she gave clear and categorical narration of events and was firm and steadfast in her accusations. However, in view of the failure of the prosecution to prove the fact of penile penetration with regard to the alleged rape that occurred in the evening of January 18, 2006, the Court downgraded the offense to acts of lasciviousness. Thus, the Court found the accused guilty of Two (2) counts of Qualified Rape in Criminal Cases No. 134832-H and 134833-H. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. He is also found guilty of One (1) count of Sexual Abuse in Criminal Case No. 134834-H. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

Summary of outcome

He is sentenced to suffer the following, viz:

For Criminal Case Nos. 134832-H and 134833-H (Qualified Rape): The offender is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, and ordered to pay the victim the amounts of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages, and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages, for each count; and
For Criminal Case No. 134834-H (Sexual Abuse): He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, to pay a fine of P15,000.00, and to pay the victim the amounts of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages. All monetary awards for damages shall earn an interest rate of six percent (6%) per annum to be computed from the finality of the judgment until fully paid.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Ponente: PERALTA, J.:

Long title: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. FRANCIS URSUA Y BERNAL, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.DECISION

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 14.559788

Longitude: 121.081293

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

FRANCIS URSUA .pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

People v. Ursua

Primary Documents

Notifications