Previous 3 / 12 Next

At around 2:00 o'clock in the morning, [he] was awakened by the punches thrown at him by AAA's uncle, CCC, who claimed to have seen him molesting the girl. He was surprised. Another uncle, ODD, followed suit and both clobbered him. His cousin, Randy Ramirez, intervened to pacify, and brought him home. At home, he narrated to his mother what [had] happened, and she cried. Then, policemen arrived at their house to arrest him, although without showing any warrant of arrest.[8] Ruling of the Regional Trial Court In its Decision dated February 3, 2011, the RTC found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code in Criminal Case No. 07-0284 and acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 in Criminal Case No. 07-0589.[9] It held that: On the first rape, AAA narrated that she was roused from sleep when accused was removing her pajama and panty. After removing he[r] pajama and panty, accused licked her vagina, [and] inserted something hard into [it]. [She later clarified that it was appellant's penis that was inserted into her vagina] She did not disclose this to anybody because accused told her not to tell it to anybody.[10] xxxx On the alleged (second rape incident], AAA narrated that she was roused from sleep when her uncle[,] CCC[,] was shouting angry words at the accused when they saw the latter lying on top of AAA. x x x It is clear from AAA's testimony that when the accused carried out the lecherous intent on March 18, 2007, he did not commit rape, consummated nor attempt[ed]. There [was] no indication that accused successfully penetrated, at least the labia of AAA. Accused should only be held liable for acts of lasciviousness.[11] Accordingly, the RTC sentenced appe1lant to suffer the penalty of a) reclusion perpetua and to pay "AAA" P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75.000.00 as moral damages and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages in Criminal Case No. 07-0284; and b) imprisonment of six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as maximum, and to pay "AAA" P30,000.00 as civil indemnity, P30,000.00 as moral damages and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages in Criminal Case No. 07-0589.[12] Appellant thereafter appealed the RTC Decision before the CA. Ruling of the Court of Appeals The CA affirmed the RTC Decision in toto. Like the RTC, the CA found "AAA's"

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

People v. Ramirez

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 219863

Division: PH Supreme Court First Division

Date of decision: Mar 6, 2018

Year of decision: 2018

GBV Case Type

Child Rape
Minor
Rape
Statutory Rape

Nature of the case: The accused, who is the victim's neighbor and a friend of the victim's uncle had carnal knowledge of the 6-year-old victim. The Court held that the accused's defense of denial cannot prevail over the victim's testimony as it was not properly corroborated or substantiated by clear and convincing evidence. The Court found the accused GUILTY of QUALIFIED STATUTORY RAPE in Criminal Case No. 07-0589, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. However, the RTC committed a grave mistake when it relied on hearsay evidence to convict appellant of the crime of acts of lasciviousness and hence the accused was acquitted in the said offense.

Summary of outcome: He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and amounts of the civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages are increased to P100,000.00.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Ponente: DEL CASTILLO, J.:

Long title: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. RICHARD RAMIREZ Y TULUNGHARI, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 14.449764

Longitude: 120.98255

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

RAMIREZ.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

People v. Ramirez

Primary Documents

Notifications