Robert Sierra vs People of the Philippines

Robert   Sierra   vs   People of   the   Philippines

GR 182941

                                                                        (July 3, 2009)

Facts:

In August 2000, thirteen-year-old AAA was playing with her friend BBB in the second floor of her family’s house in Palatiw, Pasig. The petitioner who was fifteen years old at that time, arrived holding a knife and told AAA and BBB that he wanted to play with them. The petitioner then undressed BBB and had sexual intercourse with her. Afterwards, he turned to AAA, undressed her, and also had sexual intercourse with her by inserting his male organ into hers.

He was convicted of rape and was imposed a penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua and a fine.   He   elevated   the   case   to   CA   and   during   the pendency of   the   case,   RA   9344   took   effect.   CA affirmed   the conviction and denied the   defense   of minority   since   the   age   was   not   established   by presenting the birth certificate but only alleged in the testimonial   of   the   petitioner   and   his   mother. According to them the burden of proof of age is upon the prosecution.

ISSUE:

Whether   the   law   be   given   retroactive application.

Ruling:  Yes

Ratio:

The duty to establish the age of the accused is not on the prosecution but on the accused. Age can be established by birth certificate. Sec. 7 provides that in the absence of such document, age may be based from the information of the child, testimonies of other persons,   physical   appearance   and   other   relevant evidence. Also in case of doubt, minority should be in favor of the child. In the case at bar, minority was established by the testimonies of the petitioner and his mother. This was not objected by the prosecution and did   not   even   presented   contrary   evidence.   Thus, minority is established. The   law   should   be   given   retroactive application since this favors the accused as provided for in the Revised Penal Code – penal laws favoring the accused should be given retroactive effect. Hence the accused is considered a minor with an age of not above 15 years old. The case is dismissed and the petitioner is referred to the appropriate local social welfare.