SC finds father guilty of attempted rape of minor daughter

As it increased the offense imposed on a father for sexually violating his minor daughter, the Supreme Court (SC) reiterated that courts may impose heavier penalties when an accused appeals a criminal conviction as it reopens the entire case.

In a 16-page decision, the SC En Banc denied the appeal of XXX and found him guilty of attempted rape instead of unjust vexation, imposing a heavier penalty against him.

According to the court, 16-year-old AAA was sexually violated by her father in 2013. He threatened to kill her and other relatives if she told anyone about the incident.

He attempted to assault her again a week later. However, as he was about to climb on top of her with his genitals exposed, she managed to stop him by kneeing him in the stomach.

She later confided in her brother and grandmother.

The regional trial court initially found XXX guilty of rape for the first incident and of unjust vexation for the second incident.

The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the ruling.

For its part, though the SC affirmed the ruling for the first incident, it overturned the ruling for the second incident and found the man guilty of attempted rape.

The SC said that for attempted rape by carnal knowledge, there is no requirement that the offender’s penis touch the victim’s genitalia or any other part of her body.

“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 SC said.

“Had it not been for AAA’s kick to his stomach, XXX’s act would have logically and necessarily ripened into rape,” it added.

Due to this, XXX was sentenced to a maximum of 40 years of imprisonment for rape and up to 12 years for attempted rape.

Meanwhile, the SC reiterated that an appeal gives the reviewing court full jurisdiction over a case.

“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,” it said.

The decision, penned by Associate Justice Antonio Kho Jr. was promulgated in February and published in May. — RSJ, GMA Integrated News