Heavier Penalties When Accused Appeals Criminal Case
The Supreme Court (SC) has once again underscored that courts may impose heavier penalties when an accused appeals a criminal conviction. This principle was reaffirmed in a recent case involving a father charged with sexually violating his minor daughter.
In a detailed 16-page decision, the SC En Banc dismissed the appeal of the accused and found him guilty of attempted rape rather than unjust vexation, leading to the imposition of harsher penalties against him.
Case Background and Court Findings
The court’s records show that in 2013, a 16-year-old girl, referred to as AAA, was sexually violated by her father. He threatened to kill her and other family members if she disclosed the act to anyone.
A week later, the father tried to assault her again. Just as he attempted to mount her with his genitals exposed, AAA managed to fend him off by kneeing him in the stomach. She later confided in her brother and grandmother about these incidents.
Trial and Appeal Stages
The regional trial court initially convicted the father of rape for the first incident and unjust vexation for the second. The Court of Appeals upheld this ruling.
However, the Supreme Court affirmed the rape conviction for the first offense but upgraded the second incident’s charge from unjust vexation to attempted rape.
Legal Interpretation on Attempted Rape
The SC clarified that for attempted rape by carnal knowledge, the law does not require the offender’s penis to touch the victim’s genitalia or any part of her body. The court emphasized that the act of attempting to mount with an exposed penis is sufficient to constitute attempted rape.
“Here, AAA awoke to find that her underwear had been removed. XXX, with his penis exposed, tried to mount her. The act of mounting AAA indicates no other intention but to commit the crime of rape,” the court said.
“Had it not been for AAA’s kick to his stomach, XXX’s act would have logically and necessarily ripened into rape,” the decision added.
Sentencing and Judicial Authority on Appeals
Consequently, the accused was sentenced to up to 40 years imprisonment for rape and up to 12 years for attempted rape. The SC reiterated that when an accused appeals a criminal conviction, the reviewing court gains full jurisdiction to reconsider the entire case and may impose heavier penalties.
“In People v. Mirandilla, Jr., the Court explained that an accused who appeals from the sentence of the trial court effectively waives the constitutional safeguard against double jeopardy and calls upon the appellate court to render judgment as law and justice dictate, whether favorable or unfavorable to the appellant,” the ruling stated.
For more information, visit Filipinokami.com.