THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. HON. LORENZO B. VENERACION, HENRY LAGARTO y PETILLA and ERNESTO CORDERO, respondents.
G.R. Nos. 119987-88 October 12, 1995
FACTS:
The case arose from the conviction of two individuals by the respondent judge with the crime of Rape with Homicide of seven-year old girl. The accused on the incident also caused fatal injuries to the minor child by slashing her vagina, hitting her head with a thick peace of wood and stabling her neck, which were all the direct cause of her immediate death. Respondent-judge however, instead of imposing the corresponding death penalty, imposed rather the reclusion perpetua to each accused.
The City Prosecutor filed a Motion for Reconsideration praying that the decision be modified that the penalty be death instead of reclusion perpetua. Respondent-judge still denied the motion citing religious convictions.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the respondent-judge acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when he failed to attach the corresponding penalty of the crime of Rape with Homicide.
HELD:
Yes, respondent-judge clearly acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in the attaching the proper corresponding penalty of the crime of Rape with Homicide. The Supreme Court mandates that after an adjudication of guilt, the judge should impose the proper penalty provided for by law on the accused regardless of his own religious or moral beliefs. Respondent-judge is duty bound to emphasize that a court of law is no place for a protracted debate on the morality or propriety of the sentence, where the law itself provides for the sentence of death as penalty in specific and well defined instances. The discomfort faced by those forced by law to impose the death penalty is an ancient one, but is a matter upon which judges have no choice. This is consistent in the rule laid down in the Civil Code Article 9, that no judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason of the silence, obscurity, or insufficiency of the laws.
Thus, the petition was granted, the Court remanded the case back to the respondent-judge for the imposition of death penalty of the accused.
