Criminal Law

People of the Philippines vs Noel Caoili

Can't share this digest on Facebook? Here's why.

image_printPrint this!

G.R. No. 196342 – G.R. No. 196848 – Criminal Law – Book II – Rape by Sexual Intercourse – Rape by Sexual Assault – Rape by Sexual Assault is not Necessarily Included in Rape by Sexual Intercourse – Variance Doctrine

Remedial Law – Criminal Procedure – Rule 120 – Variance Doctrine

Noel Caoili was accused of raping his daughter. He was charged with Rape by Sexual Intercourse under paragraph 1 of Art. 266-A of the Revised Penal Code (as amended by RA 8353). Trial ensued and after both sides presented their respective evidence, Caoili was convicted of Rape by Sexual Assault under paragraph 2 of Art. 266-A of the Revised Penal Code (as amended by RA 8353).

ISSUE: Whether or not the conviction was proper.

HELD: No. Rape by Sexual Assault is not subsumed in Rape by Sexual Intercourse.

It is true that under the Variance Doctrine (Sec. 4 and 5, Rule 120, Rules of Court), an accused may be convicted of a crime different from what was charged in the Information so long as the crime is necessarily included in the crime charged and the same is proved during trial.

In this case however, rape by sexual assault is a totally different crime from rape by sexual intercourse.

The elements of rape through sexual intercourse are: (1) that the offender is a man; (2) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (3) that such act is accomplished by using force or intimidation. Rape by sexual intercourse is a crime committed by a man against a woman, and the central element is carnal knowledge.

On the other hand, the elements of rape by sexual assault are: (1) that the offender commits an act of sexual assault; (2) that the act of sexual assault is committed by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice or by inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person; and that the act of sexual assault is accomplished by using force or intimidation, among others.

In the first mode (rape by sexual intercourse): (1) the offender is always a man; (2) the offended party is always a woman; (3) rape is committed through penile penetration of the vagina; and (4) the penalty is reclusion perpetua.

In the second mode (rape by sexual assault): (1) the offender may be a man or a woman; (2) the offended party may be a man or a woman; (3) rape is committed by inserting the penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person; and (4) the penalty is prision mayor.

To have Caoili be convicted of Rape by Sexual Assault when the Information charged was Rape by Sexual Intercourse will be in violation of his right to be informed of the nature of the accusation against him.

The Supreme Court however did not remand the case to the trial court. As per the evidence adduced, though the prosecution did not prove that he committed rape by sexual intercourse, it was proven that he committed a violation of Section 5b, of R.A. 7610 (Anti-Child Abuse Law). Caoili was sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

Read full text.

NOTE: In People vs Tulagan, it was clarified that there is no such crime as RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT. “Rape by Sexual Assault” is a misnomer. Sexual Assault is the proper designation if there is no carnal knowledge.

image_printPrint this!

Leave a Reply