Remedial Law, 2020 Bar — Question 5

ESSAY

In an Information, a man was charged with having forcible carnal knowledge of a 16-year-old woman. The Information did not contain any allegation concerning the victim’s relationship with the accused. During the direct examination of the victim, the prosecution was able to elicit information that the accused was the 16-year-old woman’s father. The defense counsel failed to object to the testimony, having also been surprised by the revelation. After trial, the judge convicted the accused of simple rape and imposed the corresponding penalty. The prosecution moved for reconsideration, claiming that the accused should be convicted of qualified rape and not simple rape because the relationship between the victim and the accused was proven, even as it had not been alleged in the Information. Is the prosecution legally correct? Explain briefly.

You can write freely without an account. Sign in to reveal the suggested answer and track your progress.