Anarna, Ma. Jelly Joyce Y.

Criminal Law II Atty David Yap

Class Student No. 3 ROBBERY WITH RAPE DAY 6

PEOPLE VS. TANO G.R. No. 133872 May 5, 2000 331 SCRA 449

PANGANIBAN, J:

FACTS:
On 6 November 1997, around 7:30pm, Amy de Guzman was tending the video store of her
cousin Ana Marinay when accused-appelant Alexander Taño, a relative of Ana’s husband, went inside
the video store, asked what time the spouses be home, uneasy Taño came in and out of the shop several
times and on the last, he jumped over Amy with a knife on hand, pulled her in the kitchen and asked her
to undress, and while he was raping her, he was stopped when someone knocked on the door and asked
Ana to go upstairs. Again when he went up, he again tried to rape her, when refused, he punched her in
the stomach. The third instance is when he dragged her in the toilet, banged her head again to lose her
consciousness again. Then Taño proceeded upstairs to rob and take the money and jewelry of the
spouses.

The Regional Trial Court convicted Taño of the crime Robbery with Rape.

Taño contends that the rape is not proven and that he admit the robbery, also that dwelling
should not be appreciated since it happened in the store.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the trial court erred in convicting accussed-appellant of the crime robbery with
rape?

HELD:
Yes, the trial court erred in convicting accussed-appellant of the crime robbery with rape.
According to the Supreme Court, “We do not, however, agree with the trial court that appellant is guilty
of the special complex crime of robbery with rape. This felony contemplates a situation where the
original intent of the accused was to take, with intent to gain, personal property belonging to another;
and rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime.”

Appellant may well be convicted of the separate offenses of rape and robbery notwithstanding
the fact that the offense charged in the Information is only “Robbery with Rape.” In a similar case,
People v. Barrientos, this Court held: “x x x Controlling in an Information should not be the title of the
complaint, nor the designation of the offense charged or the particular law or part thereof allegedly
violated, these being, by and large, mere conelusions of law made by the prosecutor, but the description
of the crime charged and the particular facts therein recited. Neither is it the technical name given to
the offense by the prosecutor, more than the allegations made by him, that should predominate in
determining the true character of the crime. There should also be no problem in convicting an accused
of two or more crimes erroneously charged in one information or complaint, but later proven to be
independent crimes, as if they were made the subject of separate complaints or informations.”

Supreme Court rendered a Decision is hereby MODIFIED. Accused-Appellant Alexander Taño y

Caballero is found guilty of two separate offenses: rape and robbery. For the crime of rape, appellant is
hereby SENTENCED to reclusion perpetua and to pay Private Complainant Amy de Guzman P50,000 as
indemnity ex delicto and P30,000 as moral damages. For the crime of robbery, appellant is sentenced to
an indeterminate penalty of two (2) years and four (4) months of prision correccional, as minimum, to
eight (8) years of prision mayor, as maximum; and to pay De Guzman P2,487.65 as actual damages.

1
Anarna, Ma. Jelly Joyce Y. Criminal Law II Atty David Yap
Class Student No. 3 ROBBERY WITH RAPE DAY 6

SO ORDERED.