People v. Delos Santos
REVERSALFacts
The Antecedents: On September 12, 1994, accused-appellant Felipe delos Santos allegedly raped his stepdaughter, Nhanette Delos Santos, who was 13 years of age, by means of force and intimidation in a vacant apartment. Procedural History: On September 12, 1995, the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 95, sentenced accused-appellant to death. This Court affirmed the sentence on September 17, 1998. The Petition: Accused-appellant filed a motion to re-open the case, citing People v. Medina and People v. Gallo, to reduce his penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. He argued that the Information failed to state his relationship as step-father to the victim, which he contended was a necessary qualifying circumstance for the death penalty.
Issue(s)
Whether the failure to allege the relationship of step-father in the Information is a fatal flaw that warrants the reduction of the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. Whether the Garcia doctrine, which requires qualifying circumstances to be alleged in the Information, should be applied retroactively.
Ruling
The motion to re-open is granted. The Court modifies its previous decision, imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of the death penalty. Accused-appellant is ordered to indemnify the victim in the amount of P50,000.00 as compensatory damages and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
Ratio Decidendi
On the failure to allege the relationship of step-father: The Court held that under the amendatory provisions of Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, the attendance of any qualifying circumstance mandates the single indivisible penalty of death. These qualifying circumstances must be properly pleaded in the indictment. The Information in this case did not allege that the accused-appellant is the step-father of the victim, NHANETTE delos Santos. Therefore, the technical flaw committed by the prosecution cannot be ignored, and it constrains the Court to reduce the penalty of death to reclusion perpetua, the penalty prescribed for simple rape. Furthermore, the accused-appellant's relationship to the victim, even if proved during the trial, cannot be considered an aggravating circumstance to increase his liability, as the penalty for simple rape is the single indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. On the retroactivity of the Garcia doctrine: The Court affirmed that its ruling in People v. Garcia, which requires qualifying circumstances to be alleged in the Information, must be applied retroactively. The Court retains control over a case until the full satisfaction of the final judgment and has the authority to modify it when imperative in the higher interest of justice or when supervening events warrant it. Moreover, the Garcia doctrine forms part of the legal system of the land pursuant to Article 8 of the Civil Code. Since Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code provides for the retroactive effect of penal laws that favor the offender, the Garcia doctrine, being favorable to the accused-appellant who is not a habitual criminal, must be given retroactive effect.
Main Doctrine
The relationship of step-father to the victim must be alleged in the Information as a qualifying circumstance to warrant the imposition of the death penalty for rape under RA 7659. Failure to do so constrains the Court to impose the penalty of reclusion perpetua.