Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 90 views

    DIGEST - People Vs Lagarde

    Uploaded by

    Jestherin Baliton
    The accused, Sergio Lagarde, was convicted of raping an 11-year old girl and sentenced to death. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was not warranted as the information did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstances of using a bladed weapon and committing the crime in an uninhabited place. Additionally, the victim's age did not qualify for the death penalty. As such, the court determined that the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua rather than death, and reduced the civil indemnity from ₱75,000 to ₱50,000.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    DIGEST - People Vs Lagarde

    Uploaded by

    Jestherin Baliton
    90 views1 page
    The accused, Sergio Lagarde, was convicted of raping an 11-year old girl and sentenced to death. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was not warranted as the information did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstances of using a bladed weapon and committing the crime in an uninhabited place. Additionally, the victim's age did not qualify for the death penalty. As such, the court determined that the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua rather than death, and reduced the civil indemnity from ₱75,000 to ₱50,000.

    Original Title

    DIGEST_people vs Lagarde

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The accused, Sergio Lagarde, was convicted of raping an 11-year old girl and sentenced to death. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was not warranted as the information did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstances of using a bladed weapon and committing the crime in an uninhabited place. Additionally, the victim's age did not qualify for the death penalty. As such, the court determined that the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua rather than death, and reduced the civil indemnity from ₱75,000 to ₱50,000.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    90 views1 page

    DIGEST - People Vs Lagarde

    Uploaded by

    Jestherin Baliton
    The accused, Sergio Lagarde, was convicted of raping an 11-year old girl and sentenced to death. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was not warranted as the information did not specifically allege the aggravating circumstances of using a bladed weapon and committing the crime in an uninhabited place. Additionally, the victim's age did not qualify for the death penalty. As such, the court determined that the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua rather than death, and reduced the civil indemnity from ₱75,000 to ₱50,000.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SLC-LAW

    BATCH 7 DIGEST 50: People vs Lagarde


    TOPIC: RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
    G.R. No. 182549               January 20, 2009
    PLAINTIFF: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
    APPELLANT: SERGIO LAGARDE
    FACTS:
    Accused-appellant was charged with rape in an information which reads

    “That on or about the 27th day of December, 2001, in the municipality of San Miguel, Province of Leyte,
    Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable court, the above-named accused, with deliberate
    intent with lewd designs and by use of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
    feloniously have carnal knowledge with [AAA], 11 years old, against her will to her damage and prejudice.”

    The trial court convicted accused-appellant of rape aggravated by minority of the victim, use of bladed weapon and
    force, and uninhabited place in view of the location of the offense.

    “the Court found SERGIO LAGARDE, GUILTY, beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of Rape charged
    under the information and sentenced to suffer a maximum penalty of DEATH and pay civil indemnity to
    [AAA], the sum of seventy Five Thousand (P75,000.00) Pesos and pay moral damages in the amount of Fifty
    Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos”

    Accused-appellant questions the death penalty imposed on him, arguing that the aggravating circumstances of
    minority, use of a bladed weapon, and uninhabited place were not specifically alleged in the information. Since the
    crime was not qualified, the award of PhP 75,000 was likewise erroneous.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not the penalty imposed is proper

    RULING:

    No. The applicable penalty is only reclusion perpetua and not death, the imposition of which has been abolished.
    Without the qualifying circumstances, the indemnity should also be reduced from PhP 75,000 to PhP 50,000 only.
    The award of PhP 50,000 as moral damages is retained

    Death penalty is not warranted by the alleged aggravating circumstances, i.e., victim’s minority, use of bladed
    weapon, and uninhabited place. First, the death penalty was abolished under Republic Act No. (RA) 9346. Second,
    the use of a bladed weapon and uninhibited place cannot be appreciated here because these were not specifically
    alleged in the information. Section 8, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:

    Sec. 8. Designation of the offense.—The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense
    given by the statute, aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and
    aggravating circumstances. If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to the section
    or subsection of the statute punishing it.

    It is a basic constitutional right of the accused persons to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against
    them. It would be a denial of accused-appellant’s basic right to due process if he is charged with simple rape and
    consequently convicted with certain qualifying circumstances which were not alleged in the information.

    the use of a bladed weapon and uninhabited place are not circumstances that would call for the imposition of the
    death penalty. Moreover, The victim’s minority does not also qualify the offense to merit the death penalty. To
    warrant a death sentence, the victim must be under seven (7) years of age. . Thus, the applicable penalty is
    only reclusion perpetua and not death, the imposition of which has been abolished. Without the qualifying
    circumstances, the indemnity should also be reduced from PhP 75,000 to PhP 50,000 only. The award of PhP
    50,000 as moral damages is retained

    You might also like