ADVERTISEMENT
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 245375. June 19, 2019.]
CHRISTOPHER SATUR y ABAYA, petitioner, vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated19 June 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 245375 — Christopher Satur y Abaya v. People of the Philippines
Assailed in this Petition for Review on Certiorari are the June 22, 2018 Decision 1 and January 28, 2019 Resolution 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA)-Cagayan de Oro City, in CA-G.R. CR No. 01397-MIN, a criminal case for violation of Section 5 (b), Art. III of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610. 3
The petition is denied.
Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610 provides:
SEC. 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse. — Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse. HTcADC
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon the following:
xxx xxx xxx
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse; Provided, That when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period[.] (Emphases supplied)
The elements of sexual abuse under the aforequoted provision are, to wit:
1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.
2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse.
3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age. 4
The Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of R.A. No. 7610 define "lascivious conduct" as:
The intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any person, whether of the same or opposite sex, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a person.
All of the aforementioned elements for lascivious conduct with a child were sufficiently alleged in the Information filed against petitioner before the Regional Trial Court, and subsequently established with proof beyond reasonable doubt during the trial of the case.
Although the designation of the offense in the Information filed against petitioner was different from that for which he was eventually convicted, it cannot be said that his constitutional right to be informed of the charges against him was violated. It is well-settled that allegations in the Information determine the nature of the offense, and not the technical name that the public prosecutor assigns in the preamble of the Information. From a legal point of view, and in a very real sense, the accused is not concerned with the technical name of the crime of which he stands charged as it does not aid him in any way in his defense on the merits. Petitioner's attention and interest should be directed toward the facts alleged in the Information. The real question is not"did he commit a crime given in the law with some technical and specific name," but "did he perform the acts alleged in the body of the information in the manner therein set forth."5 CAIHTE
In this case, although petitioner was indicted for violation of Section 10 (a) of R.A. No. 7610, the Information alleged:
That on the 25th day of March 2011, around 7:00 o'clock in the evening, more or less, at x x x, Province of Bukidnon, Philippines, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused taking advantage of one AAA, a 14-year-old minor born on February 8, 1997, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously lay beside AAA touch and masturbate his penis, thereby demeaning, debasing, and degrading the intrinsic worth and dignity of the latter as a child, which act of violence caused psychological distress upon the child which is prejudicial to his development, to the damage and prejudice of the said AAA in such amount as may be allowed by law. 6
Thus, the CA is correct in ruling that petitioner should be convicted of violation of Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610 instead of Section 10 (a) considering that the act alleged to be committed by petitioner amounts to lascivious conduct as defined in R.A. No. 7610. Petitioner had been sufficiently apprised through the Information filed against him of the factual allegations against which he should defend himself.
As regards petitioner's defense of alibi, the Court has constantly ruled that the defense of alibi will not stand if it was not physically impossible for the accused to be at the locus criminis when the crime was committed. 7
Finally, the awards of damages are modified in accordance with recent jurisprudence. Petitioner is ordered to pay moral damages, exemplary damages, and civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 each, pursuant to People v. Tulagan, 8 with interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid, and a fine in the amount of P15,000.00, pursuant to Section 31 (f), Article XII of R.A. No. 7610. aScITE
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is DENIED. The assailed Decision dated June 22, 2018 and Resolution dated January 28, 2019 of the Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Christopher Satur y Abaya is found guilty of Lascivious Conduct under Section 5 (b), Article III of Republic Act No. 7610, and is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and to pay a fine of P15,000.00. He is further ORDERED to pay the victim, AAA, civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages, each, in the amount of P50,000.00. The fine, civil indemnity and damages so imposed are subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of judgement until fully paid."
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Walter S. Ong, with Associate Justices Edgardo A. Camello and Perpetua T. Atal-Paño, concurring; rollo, pp. 25-50.
2.Id. at 58-60.
3. AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. Approved June 17, 1992.
4.People v. Aycardo, 810 Phil. 309, 325 (2017).
5.Padiernos v. People, 766 Phil. 657, 670 (2015).
6.Rollo, p. 26.
7.People v. Reynes, 423 Phil. 363, 382 (2001).
8.People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, March 12, 2019.