Scribd
Upload
73 views1 page

Robert Sierra vs. People of The Philippines G.R. No. 182941 July 3, 2009

Uploaded by

M A J esty Falcon

Robert Sierra was charged with rape for sexually assaulting a 13-year old girl in 2000 when he was 15 years old. He claimed exemption from criminal liability under the Juvenile Justice Act of 2006 (RA 9344) which raised the age of criminal responsibility from 9 to 15 years old. The Supreme Court held that RA 9344 applies retroactively as it favors the accused. As Sierra was 15 at the time of the offense, the case against him must be dismissed and he should be turned over to social services in accordance with the law, even though he was already 20 years old at the time of trial. The retroactive application of the law is also justified under the Revised Penal Code which allows retroactive application

Copyright:

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

Robert Sierra vs. People of The Philippines G.R. No. 182941 July 3, 2009

Uploaded by

M A J esty Falcon
73 views1 page
Robert Sierra was charged with rape for sexually assaulting a 13-year old girl in 2000 when he was 15 years old. He claimed exemption from criminal liability under the Juvenile Justice Act of 2006 (RA 9344) which raised the age of criminal responsibility from 9 to 15 years old. The Supreme Court held that RA 9344 applies retroactively as it favors the accused. As Sierra was 15 at the time of the offense, the case against him must be dismissed and he should be turned over to social services in accordance with the law, even though he was already 20 years old at the time of trial. The retroactive application of the law is also justified under the Revised Penal Code which allows retroactive application

Original Title

SIERRA VS PEOPLE.docx

Copyright

© © All Rights Reserved

Available Formats

DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Robert Sierra was charged with rape for sexually assaulting a 13-year old girl in 2000 when he was 15 years old. He claimed exemption from criminal liability under the Juvenile Justice Act of 2006 (RA 9344) which raised the age of criminal responsibility from 9 to 15 years old. The Supreme Court held that RA 9344 applies retroactively as it favors the accused. As Sierra was 15 at the time of the offense, the case against him must be dismissed and he should be turned over to social services in accordance with the law, even though he was already 20 years old at the time of trial. The retroactive application of the law is also justified under the Revised Penal Code which allows retroactive application

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
73 views1 page

Robert Sierra vs. People of The Philippines G.R. No. 182941 July 3, 2009

Uploaded by

M A J esty Falcon
Robert Sierra was charged with rape for sexually assaulting a 13-year old girl in 2000 when he was 15 years old. He claimed exemption from criminal liability under the Juvenile Justice Act of 2006 (RA 9344) which raised the age of criminal responsibility from 9 to 15 years old. The Supreme Court held that RA 9344 applies retroactively as it favors the accused. As Sierra was 15 at the time of the offense, the case against him must be dismissed and he should be turned over to social services in accordance with the law, even though he was already 20 years old at the time of trial. The retroactive application of the law is also justified under the Revised Penal Code which allows retroactive application

Copyright:

© All Rights Reserved
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 1

ROBERT SIERRA vs.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES


G.R. No. 182941 July 3, 2009

Facts:
In August 2000, thirteen-year-old was playing with her friend in the second floor of her family’s house in
Palatiw, Pasig. The petitioner arrived holding a knife and told the thirteen-year-old and her friend that
he wanted to play with them. The petitioner then undressed one of the girl and had sexual intercourse
with her. Afterwards, he turned to AAA, undressed her, and also had sexual intercourse with her by
inserting his male organ into hers. The petitioner warned AAA not to tell anybody of what they did.
The thirteen--year-old subsequently disclosed the incident to Elena Gallano (her teacher) and to Dolores
Mangantula (the parent of a classmate), who both accompanied the child to the barangay office. The
child was later subjected to physical examination that revealed a laceration on her hymen consistent
with her claim of sexual abuse. On the basis of the complaint and the physical findings, the petitioner
was charged with rape under the following Information:
On or about August 5, 2000, in Pasig City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
accused, a minor, 15 years old, with lewd designs and by means of force, violence and intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with his (accused) sister and
the thirteen years of age, against the latter’s will and consent.
Invoking RA 9334, Juvenile Justice act of 2006, that Robert Sierra was exempt from criminal liability.

Issue: Whether or not RA 9344 constitutes retroactivity?

Held:
That the petitioner committed the rape before R.A. No. 9344 took effect and that he is no longer a minor
(he was already 20 years old when he took the stand) will not bar him from enjoying the benefit of total
exemption that Section 6 of R.A. No. 9344 grants.[41] As we explained in discussing
Sections 64 and 68 of R.A. No. 9344[42] in the recent case of Ortega v. People
Section 64 of the law categorically provides that cases of children 15 years old and below, at the time of
the commission of the crime, shall immediately be dismissed and the child shall be referred to the
appropriate local social welfare and development officers (LSWDO). What is controlling, therefore, with
respect to the exemption from criminal liability of the CICL, is not the CICLs age at the time of the
promulgation of judgment but the CICLs age at the time of the commission of the offense. In short, by
virtue of R.A. No. 9344, the age of criminal irresponsibility has been raised from 9 to 15 years old.
[Emphasis supplied]
The retroactive application of R.A. No. 9344 is also justified under Article 22 of the RPC, as amended,
which provides that penal laws are to be given retroactive effect insofar as they favor the accused who is
not found to be a habitual criminal. Nothing in the records of this case indicates that the petitioner is a
habitual criminal.

You might also like