People v. Nuguid (G.R. No. 148991)

 

G.R. No. 148991            

January 21, 2004

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee,

vs.

LEONARDO NUGUID y MAYAO, Appellant.

Facts:

About 2 AM, right after the New Year’s eve celebration, Jun Rianzares left their house to see a friend. His wife, Rowena Rianzares, was left behind sleeping inside the room of their house with their daughter and son .

Rowena heard a knock at the door of their room. She stood up and it was the appellant trying to push the door. He said that her husband was asking for money to buy liquor. Rowena Rianzares got suspicious because her husband had money at that time and he would not ask money from her. Rowena Rianzares thus closed the door. She went back to sleep but after a few minutes, she heard the appellant shouting that her husband was mad because he did not have money to buy liquor. So she opened the door and went into the appellant’s room asking, "Bakit hihingi ng pera si Kuya Jun mo may pera naman siya?" but the appellant rushed to her back and placed his left arm around her neck with his right hand holding a kitchen knife, about twelve (12) inches long.

In his defense, it was Rowena who entered his room and started to kiss his lips and that it was not their first intercourse. The first time was when they went to Bulacan to get rice from her parents. The appellant worked in the latter’s Manila K-9 college as their dog trainer for five years. 

The trial court found the accused guilty of serious illegal detention with rape and was sentence to death penalty. Hence, the automatic review.

Issue:

Is there an aggravating circumstance of dwelling?

Ruling:

None. There is dwelling if the crime was committed in the house of the victim without any provocation on the victim’s part. In this case, it was committed in the house of the victim with no provocation however, the accused was also living in the said house. The offender resided in the same house as the victim when the offense was committed, dwelling could not be considered as an aggravating circumstance. It is undisputed in this case that appellant was a "live-in" dog trainer and that he stayed in the Rianzares’ house in a room across Rowena’s room.