Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 47 views

    PP vs. Padilla (My Digest)

    Uploaded by

    Roxanne Jurial
    The Supreme Court ruled that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the appellant's absence of denial do not constitute the best evidence to prove the victim's minority in a statutory rape case. To prove minority, which qualifies the crime and increases the penalty, the prosecution must present independent evidence such as the victim's original or certified birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or school records. Failure of the appellant to object to testimony regarding the victim's age or an implied admission of age is not sufficient on its own to prove minority.

    Copyright:

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

    PP vs. Padilla (My Digest)

    Uploaded by

    Roxanne Jurial
    47 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the appellant's absence of denial do not constitute the best evidence to prove the victim's minority in a statutory rape case. To prove minority, which qualifies the crime and increases the penalty, the prosecution must present independent evidence such as the victim's original or certified birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or school records. Failure of the appellant to object to testimony regarding the victim's age or an implied admission of age is not sufficient on its own to prove minority.

    Original Description:

    evidence

    Original Title

    Pp vs. Padilla (My Digest)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the appellant's absence of denial do not constitute the best evidence to prove the victim's minority in a statutory rape case. To prove minority, which qualifies the crime and increases the penalty, the prosecution must present independent evidence such as the victim's original or certified birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or school records. Failure of the appellant to object to testimony regarding the victim's age or an implied admission of age is not sufficient on its own to prove minority.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    47 views1 page

    PP vs. Padilla (My Digest)

    Uploaded by

    Roxanne Jurial
    The Supreme Court ruled that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the appellant's absence of denial do not constitute the best evidence to prove the victim's minority in a statutory rape case. To prove minority, which qualifies the crime and increases the penalty, the prosecution must present independent evidence such as the victim's original or certified birth certificate, baptismal certificate, or school records. Failure of the appellant to object to testimony regarding the victim's age or an implied admission of age is not sufficient on its own to prove minority.

    Copyright:

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

    PP. VS.

    PADILLA
    Facts: An Information was filed against appellant, Armando Nicolas Padilla, charging him
    with the crime of statutory rape. On arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty. Pre-trial
    conference followed. Thereafter, trial ensued. the Lower Court finds the appellant
    GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Statutory Rape and sentenced him the
    capital penalty of DEATH. After a review of the case, the CA affirmed the lower courts
    decision. Hence, the appeal to the SC. The appellant argued that the prosecution was not
    able to prove the victims minority. Aside from the testimonies of prosecution
    witnesses, coupled with appellant's absence of denial, no independent substantial
    evidence was presented to prove the age of the victim. Neither was it shown by the
    prosecution that the said documents had been lost, destroyed, unavailable or were
    otherwise totally absent.
    Issue: Whether or not the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, coupled with appellants
    absence of denial are considered as BEST EVIDENCE.
    Held: No. the settled rule is that there must be independent evidence proving the age of
    the victim, other than the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and the absence of
    denial by appellant. The victim's original or duly certified birth certificate, baptismal
    certificate or school records would suffice as competent evidence of her age. Appellants
    failure to object to the testimony of the victim, regarding her age, the Court has held that
    the failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding the rape victims
    age shall not be taken against him. Even the appellant's implied admission of the victim's
    age, in the absence of any supporting independent evidence, may not be considered
    sufficient to prove her age. As the qualifying circumstance of minority alters the nature of
    the crime of rape and increases the penalty thereof, it must be proved with equal certainty
    and clearness as the crime itself.

    You might also like