The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Alejandro Atop for three counts of rape but modified the penalty from death to three terms of reclusion perpetua. The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove that nighttime was deliberately sought by Atop to facilitate the rapes. It also held that relationship was not an aggravating circumstance because Atop had no blood or legal relationship to the victim. The Court ordered Atop to pay the victim indemnity and moral damages.
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Alejandro Atop for three counts of rape but modified the penalty from death to three terms of reclusion perpetua. The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove that nighttime was deliberately sought by Atop to facilitate the rapes. It also held that relationship was not an aggravating circumstance because Atop had no blood or legal relationship to the victim. The Court ordered Atop to pay the victim indemnity and moral damages.
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Alejandro Atop for three counts of rape but modified the penalty from death to three terms of reclusion perpetua. The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove that nighttime was deliberately sought by Atop to facilitate the rapes. It also held that relationship was not an aggravating circumstance because Atop had no blood or legal relationship to the victim. The Court ordered Atop to pay the victim indemnity and moral damages.
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Alejandro Atop for three counts of rape but modified the penalty from death to three terms of reclusion perpetua. The Court found that the prosecution failed to prove that nighttime was deliberately sought by Atop to facilitate the rapes. It also held that relationship was not an aggravating circumstance because Atop had no blood or legal relationship to the victim. The Court ordered Atop to pay the victim indemnity and moral damages.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 2
Criminal Law Review
GR No. 124303-05 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff- Date: February 10, 1998 Appellee, v. ALEJANDRO ATOP, Accused- Ponente: PANGANIBAN, J.: Appellant.
(Petitioner/s) (Respondent/s)
DOCTRINE: The time-settled rule is that nocturnity, as an aggravating circumstance, must have been deliberately sought by the offender to facilitate the crime or prevent its discovery or evade his capture or facilitate his escape.[14] The culprit must have purposely taken advantage of the cover of night as an indispensable factor to attain his criminal purpose FACTS ""Private complainant Regina Guafin, told the court that she is a granddaughter of Trinidad Mejos and that the accused Alejandro Atop is the common law husband of said Trinidad Atop . Her mother is a daughter of said Trinidad Ato and lives in Pangasinan. She is an illegitimate child and she does not even know her father. Since her early childhood she stayed with her grandmother Trinidad Atop [sic] and the accused at Barangay Santa Rosa, Matag-ob, Leyte. Sometime in 1991 when she was already 10 years of age the... accused started having lustful desire on her. The accused then inserted his finger into her vagina. She told her grandmother about this but her grandmother did not believe her. She was then told by her grandmother, Trinidad Mejos, that what her grandfather did to her was just a... manifestation of fatherly concern. She continued staying with her grandmother and her common law husband Alejandro Atop, the herein accused. On October 9, 1992, she was called by the accused Alejandro Atop to do something for him. When she approached him the accused rushed towards her, removed her panty and inserted his male organ into her vagina. She was not able to do anything to resist him... because the accused gagged her mouth and was carrying a knife with him. She was then 12 years old when the first rape was committed to her and at that time her grandmother was then attending a delivery since her grandmother was a 'hilot'. When her grandmother returned home she... told her what the accused did to her but her grandmother, again, refused to believe her. She also remember [sic] of another incident wherein she was raped again by the accused Alejandro Atop. On December 31, 1994, while she together with her Aunt Gloria Montealto and her two (2) nieces Rubilen and Jubilen Atop were about to go to sleep, she noticed that the accused was looking for her. Upon seeing her the accused rushed towards her and was about to... lay on top of her. She kicked him. After that, the accused caressed and touched his nieces but his nieces also kicked him.. She reported the incidents of rape that happened in 1992, 1993 and 1994 only in January 1995. It took her so long to report the said incidents because she was afraid. The accused threatened to kill her should she tell anybody about the incidents. She was... accompanied by her Aunts Fe Decio and Rosenda Andales in reporting the said incidents to the police. Her statement was taken by the police at the police headquarters. Thereafter, she filed a complaint with the Municipal Trial Judge of Matag-ob, Leyte ISSUE/S The trial court erred in appreciating the circumstances of nighttime and relationship as aggravating the penalty imposable for the rape allegedly RATIO The time-settled rule is that nocturnity, as an aggravating circumstance, must have been deliberately sought by the offender to facilitate the crime or prevent its discovery or evade his capture or facilitate his escape.[14] The culprit must have purposely taken advantage of the cover of night as an indispensable factor to attain his criminal purpose , that the prosecution failed to prove that nighttime was deliberately sought by appellant to facilitate his dastardly acts. In fact, the prosecution failed to show that appellant... consummated his carnal designs at night, except only for the December 26, 1994 incident which the victim said occurred at 11:00 p.m.[16] Much less is there any evidence substantiating the trial court's conclusion that... appellant intentionally sought the darkness to advance his criminal exploits. Neither can we appreciate relationship as an aggravating circumstance. The scope of relationship as defined by law encompasses (1) the spouse, (2) an ascendant, (3) a descendant, (4) a legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or (5) a relative by affinity in... the same degree. Relationship by affinity refers to a relation by virtue of a legal bond such as marriage. Relatives by affinity therefore are those commonly referred to as "in-laws," or stepfather, stepmother,... stepchild and the like; in contrast to relatives by consanguinity or blood relatives encompassed under the second, third and fourth enumeration above. The law cannot be stretched to include persons attached by common-law relations. Here, there is no blood relationship or legal... bond that links the appellant to his victim. Thus, the modifying circumstance of relationship cannot be considered against him. RULING WHEREFORE, the Decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that Appellant Alejandro Atop shall not suffer the penalty of death but shall SERVE three (3) terms of reclusion perpetua, one for each of the three (3) counts of rape for which he was found GUILTY by the trial court, and is ordered to PAY Regina Guafin indemnity in the amount of P150,000 plus moral damages of P50,000.
