ART. 12: EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE CASE NO.

8:
LLAVE V PEOPLE
Facts:
Neil Llave, 12 years old, raped Debbielyn. The victim was pulled from a
vacant lot. The accused ordered her to lie down on the cement. He removed
her shorts and underwear and his own. He penetrated his penis into the
victims vagina and had a push and pull movement. Teofisto, the witness,
saw the incident and shouted. The accused fled the scence. During trial the
accused argued that being a minor, he is presumed that he acted without
discernment under paragraph 3 of Article 12 of the Revised Penal Code thus
exempt from criminal liability.
Issue: Whether or not the accused acted with discernment
Ruling:
Yes, the accused acted with discernment. The factual circumstance
which bolstered the he acted with discernment is when the accused stated
that he was an outstanding student. This allegation proves that he acted with
discernment with full knowledge and intelligence. He was possessed of
intelligence well beyond his years and thus was able to distinguish which
conduct is right or wrong. Hence, the accused is not exempt from criminal
liability.