PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES versus RAUL YAMON YAMON TUANDO TUAN DO G.R. No. 207816 Facts: This is an appeal from the Decision of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed with modifications the Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch !, "asig Cit# (stationed in Taguig Cit#) in a Criminal$ Case %o$ &'*+, finding accused Raul -amon Tuando (Tuando) guilt# of .ualified rape under Article /+A(l) (c) in relation to Article /+B (&) of the Revised "enal Code$ Tuando, who was the common+law spouse of AAA0s mother, BBB, raped AAA on or a1out 2anuar# /**$ AAA was &' #ears old at that time$ After raping AAA, Tuando threatened her not to tell BBB a1out what happened$ 3ince then, Tuando continued raping and threatening AAA upon the latter0s arrival from school$ 4t was onl# months later upon finding out her pregnanc# that AAA revealed to BBB that Tuando raped her$ BBB 1rought her daughter to her emplo#er0s house until AAA gave 1irth$ 5n 5cto1er /**, AAA was again raped 1# Tuando when she went 1ac6 to their house to visit her 1rothers$ AAA told BBB that she was raped again 1# Tuando$ "rompted 1# the a1use on her daughter, BBB filed a complaint 1efore the 1aranga# official$ Thereafter, AAA and BBB proceeded to the %ational Bureau of 4nvestigation 5ffice to report the rape and e7ecuted their sworn statements a1out the crime$ The 1aranga# officials transferred Tuando to %B4 for investigation$ Tuando denied raping AAA and insisted that he never forced AAA to su1mit to se7ual intercourse8 that it was consensual and that it was committed out of love$ After the trial, the RTC re9ected the sweetheart defense of the accused and found that the prosecution was a1le to prove the guilt of the accused 1e#ond reasona1le dou1t$ Convinced that Tuando raped AAA, the RTC found found the the accuse accused d guilt# guilt# of .uali .ualifie fied d rape$ rape$ pon pon appe appeal al,, the the court court of Appe Appeals als affir affirmed med with with modifications the ruling of the trial court8 hence, the appeal to 3upreme Court$ 4ssues: ;hether or not the appellate court gravel# erred in convicting Tuando under a different criminal information which violate his right to 1e informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him< Ruling: The court dismissed the appeal for lac6 of merit$ 4n the issue of denial of due process, Tuando contended that his right to 1e informed was violated when the appellate court affirmed his conviction despite the fact that the crime of which he was convicted was different from the one he pleaded to and was charged with$ e cited the case of "eople vs$ =aldesacho to support his argument$ But the court disagreed and stated that his reliance on =aldesacho =aldesacho was misplaced for the circumstances of his case was different from that case$ 4n this case, the accused was charged with rape committed sometime in 2anuar# /** against AAA$ AAA$ e was a1le to present evidence evidence (1ased on sweetheart sweetheart defense in that he and AAA were lovers and that the# had a consensual se7ual intercourse on the said date) proving where he was on 2anuar# /** when the crime was committed$ As em1odied in 3ection & (&), Article 444 of the &!> Constitution, no person shall 1e held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law$ Further, paragraph / of the same section, it provides that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has a right to 1e informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him$ 4t is further provided under 3ections > and ! of Rule &&* of the Revised Rules of Court that a complaint or information to 1e filed in court must contain a designation given to the offense 1# the statute, 1esides the statement of the acts or omissions constituting the same, and if there is no such designation, reference should 1e made to the section or su1section of the statute punishing it and the acts or omissions complained of as constituting constituting the offense$ offense$ The court ruled that the appellant appellant was sufficientl# sufficientl# informed of the crime he was accused of$ That was clear from the defense that he mounted, i$e$, that the victim is his sweetheart and that the# treated each other as spouses$ 4n short, Tuando was not denied of his constitutional right and was given ever# opportunit# to answer the accusation against him$ WHERE WHEREFOR FORE, E, the the appeal is DISMIS DISMISSE SED D and and the the Deci Decisi sion on of the the Cour Courtt of Appea ppeals ls date dated d / 3eptem1er 3eptem1er /*&/ in CA+?$R$ CR+C %o$ */*, finding accused+appellant accused+appellant RAMON YAMON TUANDO guilt# of .ualified rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalt# of reclusion perpetua without eligi1ilit# for parole is AFFIRMED wit t! "o##owi$% &o'i"i()tio$*+ Appellant RA@ - A5% TA%D is &o'i"i()tio$*+ (&) Appellant ordered to pa# the victim AAA "l **,***$** as civil indemnit#, "l **,***$** as moral damages, and "l**,***$** "l**,***$** as e7emplar# damages8 (/) All damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of per annum from the date of finalit# of this decision until full# paid8 (') Appellant Appellant is further ordered to support the offspring 1orn as a conse.uence of the rape$ The amount of support shall 1e determined 1# the trial court after due notice and hearing, with support in arrears to 1e rec6oned from the date the appealed decision was promulgated 1# the trial court$
