Pielago vs People [G.R. No. 202020] Case Digest

Pielago vs People

G.R. No. 202020

 

 

Facts:

Mike Pielago was charged for the crime of of acts of lasciviousness in the RTC Ligao city. At the trial, the prosecution presented the testimonies of AAA; her mother, BBB; and others. Pielago denied the charge against him. The defense, on the other hand, presented the testimonies of the accused; Nestor and Celeste Pielago, his parents; Myrna Ros De La Torre, his aunt; and some of the residents of Barangay Allang where the accused and the victim reside.

RTC rendered decision holding that the accused is guilty for the crime of rape by sexual assault because the factual allegations contained in the Information and the provisions of existing laws pertain to the crime of rape by sexual assault defined and penalized under Section 266-A of the Revised Penal Code.. CA affirmed in toto the decision of RTC.

 

Issue:

Whether or not the Constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation was violated.

 

Held:

No.

 

Ratio:

It is well-settled that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused is entitled to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. In this respect, the designation in the Information of the specific statute violated is imperative to avoid surprise on the accused and to afford him the opportunity to prepare his defense accordingly. In the instant case, the designation of the offense in the Information against Pielago was changed from the crime of acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 to the crime of rape by sexual assault penalized under Article 266-A(2) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 8353. It cannot be said, however, that his right to be properly informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him was violated.

What controls is not the title of the information or the designation of the offense but the actual facts recited in the information. In other words, it is the recital of facts of the commission of the offense, not the nomenclature of the offense, that determines the crime being charged in the information.