PEOPLE Vs QUIACHON
G.R. No.: 170236 August 31, 2006
Facts:
The appellant, Roberto Quiachon was charged with the crime of qualified rape committed by means of force and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously has sexual intercourse with Rowena, his 8 years old deaf-mute daughter, against her will and consent. His act was then witnessed by his son, Rowel.
After due consideration, the Regional trial Court of Pasig City Branch 159 rendered its decision on September 9, 2003 finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape penalized in Art. 266-A and B. He was sentenced maximum penalty of death and to indemnify the offended party of other damages.
By reason of the death penalty imposed to the appellant, the case was automatically elevated to the Supreme Court. But it was however transferred and referred to the Court of Appeals. Having done so, the CA, after its thorough review of the case at hand, affirmed the decision of the RTC as regards to the death sentence executed to the appellant with modification on the amount of other damages to be indemnified. The case, then finally raised to the Supreme Court. But even before the appellate court could even decide the case, R.A. 9346 an act that abolishes death penalty law was enacted.
Issue:
Whether or Not the appellant is entitled of the benefit under Section 2 of R.A. 9346
Ruling:
Yes, the appellant is entitled of the benefit under Section 2 of R.A. 9346. It imposed that: a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code; or b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code. Also pursuant to the criminal law principle of favorabilia sunt amplianda adiosa restrigenda (penal laws which are favorable to the accused are given retroactive effect) and Article 22 of the Revised Penal Code provides for the retroactivity of penal laws. In the light of the foregoing instances, however immoral and vicious the crime committed, in the eyes of the law, the appellant was entitled of the benefit granted in R.A. 9346 Section 2.
Ponente: J. Callejo Sr.