Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 27 views

    G.R. No. 172708 May 5, 2010 People of The Philippines, Appellee, JOSEPH AMPER y REPASO, Appellant

    Uploaded by

    Kin Pearly Flores
    The appellant was accused of robbing and raping a woman ("AAA") in 1995. While "AAA" was walking to buy peanuts, the appellant approached her from behind, held a pointed instrument to her side, and forced her to a secluded area behind a church. There, he removed her clothes and jewelry and raped her. After satisfying himself, he fled. "AAA" reported the crime to her father and the police. A few days later, the appellant was arrested for an unrelated crime of robbery and attempted rape. When "AAA" identified him at the police station, he was charged with robbery with rape of "AAA". The court upheld the conviction, finding that "AAA" positively identified the appellant in

    Copyright:

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

    G.R. No. 172708 May 5, 2010 People of The Philippines, Appellee, JOSEPH AMPER y REPASO, Appellant

    Uploaded by

    Kin Pearly Flores
    27 views2 pages
    The appellant was accused of robbing and raping a woman ("AAA") in 1995. While "AAA" was walking to buy peanuts, the appellant approached her from behind, held a pointed instrument to her side, and forced her to a secluded area behind a church. There, he removed her clothes and jewelry and raped her. After satisfying himself, he fled. "AAA" reported the crime to her father and the police. A few days later, the appellant was arrested for an unrelated crime of robbery and attempted rape. When "AAA" identified him at the police station, he was charged with robbery with rape of "AAA". The court upheld the conviction, finding that "AAA" positively identified the appellant in

    Original Description:

    ARHE5

    Original Title

    G1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The appellant was accused of robbing and raping a woman ("AAA") in 1995. While "AAA" was walking to buy peanuts, the appellant approached her from behind, held a pointed instrument to her side, and forced her to a secluded area behind a church. There, he removed her clothes and jewelry and raped her. After satisfying himself, he fled. "AAA" reported the crime to her father and the police. A few days later, the appellant was arrested for an unrelated crime of robbery and attempted rape. When "AAA" identified him at the police station, he was charged with robbery with rape of "AAA". The court upheld the conviction, finding that "AAA" positively identified the appellant in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    27 views2 pages

    G.R. No. 172708 May 5, 2010 People of The Philippines, Appellee, JOSEPH AMPER y REPASO, Appellant

    Uploaded by

    Kin Pearly Flores
    The appellant was accused of robbing and raping a woman ("AAA") in 1995. While "AAA" was walking to buy peanuts, the appellant approached her from behind, held a pointed instrument to her side, and forced her to a secluded area behind a church. There, he removed her clothes and jewelry and raped her. After satisfying himself, he fled. "AAA" reported the crime to her father and the police. A few days later, the appellant was arrested for an unrelated crime of robbery and attempted rape. When "AAA" identified him at the police station, he was charged with robbery with rape of "AAA". The court upheld the conviction, finding that "AAA" positively identified the appellant in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    172708 May 5, 2010

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee,


    vs.
    JOSEPH AMPER y REPASO, Appellant.

    FACTS:

    On August 17, 1995, at approximately 7:30 in the evening, "AAA"4 was walking along Mateo Manila
    Street near Leon Guinto Memorial College located at Brgy. Zone II, Poblacion, Atimonan, Quezon to
    buy peanuts for her father.5 While approaching the place of a certain Noni Magisa, appellant
    suddenly put his hand on "AAA’s" shoulder, poked a pointed instrument at the left side of her body
    and ordered her not to make any move.6 The appellant then directed her to walk casually towards
    the direction of the church. 7 When they reached the back of the church, appellant ordered "AAA" to
    sit on the cemented floor and to remove all the pieces of jewelry she was wearing, particularly her
    wrist watch, bracelet and pair of earrings.8
    1avvphi1

    After ordering "AAA" to lie down on the floor,9 appellant removed "AAA’s" shorts and
    underwear10 then also lowered his own pants and briefs11 and forcibly inserted his penis into her
    vagina and made push and pull movements.12 All this time, appellant poked a weapon at the left side
    of "AAA’s" neck which prevented her from shouting for help.13After satisfying his lust, appellant told
    "AAA" not to leave until he was gone.14

    After about two minutes, "AAA" put on her garments and hurried home

    where she narrated the incident to her father.15 Both proceeded to the place where the incident
    happened16 but appellant could no longer be found.17 "AAA" and her father proceeded to the police
    station and reported the matter.18 Thereafter, Dr. Lourdes Taguinod (Dr. Taguinod) of Doña Martha
    Hospital examined her.19

    On August 22, 1995, appellant was arrested for robbery and attempted rape committed against
    another individual.20On the following day,21 "AAA" went to the police station and identified appellant
    as the person who robbed and raped her.22

    Subsequently, an Information was filed against appellant charging him with the crime of robbery with
    rape

    HELD:

    The appeal lacks merit.

    We have consistently ruled that an accused is estopped from assailing the legality of his arrest if he
    fails to raise this issue, or to move for the quashal of the information against him on this ground,
    which should be made before arraignment.33 In this case, appellant only raised for the first time the
    alleged irregularity of his arrest in his appeal before the CA. This is not allowed considering that he
    was already properly arraigned and even actively participated in the proceedings. He is, therefore,
    deemed to have waived such alleged defect when he submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the
    court.

    We likewise cannot sustain appellant’s contention that his identification was marked by
    suggestiveness. Appellant claims that he was arrested after the incident based on the suggestion of
    the police officer and not on the identification made by "AAA". It must be stressed that what is crucial
    is for the witness to positively declare during trial that the persons charged were the malefactors.34 In
    this case, "AAA" positively and categorically identified appellant during trial as her molester. She
    could not have been mistaken because she had a fairly good look at appellant’s face even before
    the commission of the crime.35 The place where she first saw the appellant was well-
    lighted.36 Moreover, "AAA" never faltered in her identification of the appellant.

    You might also like