G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant.

9/16/24, 10:57 PM

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 264352. December 4, 2023.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, [*] accused-appellant.

DECISION

LAZARO-JAVIER, J p:

The Case

This Appeal [1] assails the Decision [2] of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 03145
dated June 29, 2022 affirming accused-appellant XXX264352's conviction for rape.

Antecedents

By Information dated February 28, 2017, accused-appellant was charged with rape, as follows:

That on or about the 10 December 2016 in the City of ________________,

Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, said accused by means of
force, threat and/or intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously
have carnal knowledge of [AAA264352], against the will and without the consent of said
offended party, to her damage and prejudice. HTcADC

CONTRARY TO LAW. [3]

On arraignment, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty. Trial ensued. [4]

During the trial, the prosecution presented the testimonies of AAA264352, her daughter
CCC264352, and Dr. Medardo S. Estanda (Dr. Estanda). [5] The defense, on the other hand, presented
the lone testimony of accused-appellant. [6]

Prosecution's Version

Sixty-nine-year-old complainant AAA264352 testified that on December 10, 2016, at 10:30 p.m.,
she was sleeping when accused-appellant, her brother-in-law, suddenly entered her house. She was
alarmed so she reached for her bolo as accused-appellant approached her, held both of her hands, and
pushed her against the wall. She immediately tried to strike him with her bolo but missed. He then
twisted her hand, causing her bolo to fall on the ground. She tried to retrieve her bolo, but failed. He then
pushed her and forcefully laid her down on the bed. He pulled her duster up, forcibly pulled her legs

about:srcdoc Page 1 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

apart, laid on top of her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. After the act, he stood up, put on his
clothes, and told her not to close the door because he was coming back. [7]

CCC264352, the daughter of AAA264352, testified that she was awakened by her younger sister
who told her that she heard their mother groaning as if she was in pain. She immediately went to
AAA264352's nipa hut nearby and was shocked to see her crying and in pain. AAA264352 then told her
that accused-appellant raped her. They immediately reported the incident to the police station. [8]

Dr. Estanda then conducted a medical and physical examination on AAA264352 and found that
there was spermatozoa in her vagina, "compatible with previous sexual intercourse," per Living Case
Report dated December 12, 2016. [9]

The Version of the Defense

Accused-appellant denied the charge. He testified that on December 10, 2016, he was in the
cockpit in _______________ from 10:30 p.m. to 4:00 a.m.; thus, he could not have raped AAA264352.
[10]

Ruling of the Trial Court

As borne by its Decision dated May 16, 2018 [11] the trial court rendered a verdict of conviction,
thus: CAIHTE
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this court finds the accused [XXX264352]
GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE under Article 266-A (1) in relation
to Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and hereby imposes the penalty
of RECLUSION PERPETUA. Accordingly, accused is likewise ordered to pay
[AAA264352] the following amounts:

1. As civil indemnity, One Hundred Thousand Pesos ([PHP]100,000.00);

2. As moral damages, One Hundred Thousand Pesos ([PHP]100,000.00); and

3. As exemplary damages, One Hundred Thousand Pesos ([PHP]100,000.00).

All damages awarded shall earn interest at six percent (6%) per annum from the
date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.

The Jail Warden, _______________, District Jail, _______________, is ordered

to immediately transfer the custody of the accused to the National Penitentiary,
Muntinlupa, for the service of his sentence.

Furnish copies of this judgment the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), parties
and counsels.

SO ORDERED. [12] (Emphasis in the original)

about:srcdoc Page 2 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

The trial court gave full credence to AAA264352's testimony. She positively narrated that
accused-appellant, her brother-in-law, sexually ravished her. She tried to fight him off and strike him with
her bolo, but her 69-year-old body was too frail, and he easily parried her attempts to resist. In contrast,
accused-appellant's weak defense of denial must fail. [13]

The Proceedings Before the Court of Appeals

On appeal, accused-appellant faulted the trial court for convicting him despite the alleged
incredible and inconsistent testimony of AAA264352. Too, the Living Case Report dated December 12,
2016 issued by Dr. Estanda proved that there were no lacerations or tears in her vagina, thereby
disproving sexual intercourse. Finally, assuming arguendo that there was sexual intercourse, the same
was consensual as AAA264352 failed to resist his sexual advances and shout for help. [14]

For its part, the Office of the Solicitor General maintained that the prosecution proved accused-
appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. There was nothing incredulous in AAA264352's statements.
Too, her testimony was duly corroborated by the medical findings and testimony of Dr. Estanda. [15]

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

By Decision [16] dated June 29, 2022, the Court of Appeals affirmed the verdict of conviction but
decreased the monetary awards, viz.: aScITE

WHEREFORE, the instant appeal is DISMISSED. The trial court's Decision dated
May 16, 2018 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION as regards civil indemnity and
damages. Accused-appellant [XXX264352] is ORDERED to pay [AAA264352] Seventy[-
]Five Thousand Pesos ([PHP]75,000.00) as civil indemnity, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos
([PHP]75,000.00) as moral damages, and Seventy Five Thousand Pesos
([PHP]75,000.00) as exemplary damages with all such amounts to earn interest of six
percent (6%) per annum from date of finality of this Decision until fully paid.

SO ORDERED. [17] (Emphasis in the original)

The Court of Appeals ruled that all the elements of rape were proved beyond reasonable doubt.
AAA264352 identified accused-appellant in open court as her brother-in-law and the same person who
sexually assaulted her, and testified in detail how the latter raped her. Too, Dr. Estanda's Living Case
Report dated December 12, 2016 established that there was presence of spermatozoa consistent with
sexual intercourse. Finally, accused-appellant's defenses of denial and alibi cannot prevail over the
categorical and clear statements of AAA264352. [18]

The Present Appeal

Accused-appellant now seeks anew a verdict of acquittal. [19] Accused-appellant [20] and the
Office of the Solicitor General [21] both manifest that, in lieu of supplemental briefs, they are adopting
their respective Briefs before the Court of Appeals. DETACa

about:srcdoc Page 3 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

Our Ruling

The appeal must fail.

Under Article 266-A (1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, rape requires the following
elements:

(1) the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and

(2) the offender accomplished such act through force, threat, or intimidation. [22]

Here, the prosecution had sufficiently established accused-appellant's guilt of the crime charged
through the straightforward testimony of AAA264352 herself. AAA264352, who was 69 years old at the
time of the rape, testified that accused-appellant, who was 50 years old, [23] held both of her hands,
pushed her against the wall, and twisted her arm. He then forced her to lie down, pulled her legs apart,
laid on top of her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. Too, this testimony was corroborated by the
Living Case Report issued by Dr. Estanda showing that spermatozoa was present, consistent with
previous sexual intercourse. Jurisprudence dictates that when the testimony of a rape victim is
consistent with the medical findings, sufficient basis exists to warrant a conclusion that the essential
requisite of carnal knowledge has been established. [24]

AAA264352's testimony was positive, candid, categorical, and replete with material details, thus,
meriting full weight and credence. It is settled that the trial court's factual findings on the credibility of
witnesses are accorded respect, if not conclusive effect. This is because the trial court has the unique
opportunity to observe the witnesses' demeanor, and is in the best position to discern whether they are
telling the truth or not. [25] This rule becomes more compelling when such factual findings carry the full
concurrence of the Court of Appeals, as here.

Against AAA264352's positive testimony, accused-appellant's defense of denial must, thus, fail.
Too, for alibi to prosper, accused-appellant must not only prove that he was at some other place at the
time of the commission of the crime, he must also prove that it was physically impossible for him to have
been present at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission. [26]

Here, accused-appellant averred that he was in a cockpit on the night in question. He admitted,
however, that the cockpit was only 11 kilometers or less than one hour away. Evidently, he failed to
establish that it was impossible for him to be present at AAA264352's house at the time of the incident.
[27]

Penalty

Under Article 266-B [28] of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, the penalty for rape is reclusion
perpetua. In the absence of any mitigating and aggravating circumstances, therefore, accused-appellant
was correctly sentenced to reclusion perpetua. HEITAD

As for damages, the Court of Appeals awarded PHP75,000.00 as civil indemnity, PHP75,000.00

about:srcdoc Page 4 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

as moral damages and PHP75,000.00 as exemplary damages. [29] Considering, however, that
AAA264352 was already 69 years old, a senior citizen, at the time of the rape, having been born on
November 20, 1948, [30] the Court deems it proper to increase the awards of civil indemnity, moral
damages, and exemplary damages to PHP100,000.00 each.

Finally, applying People v. Jugueta, [31] 6% interest per annum on the total monetary award was
correctly imposed from finality of the verdict of conviction.

ACCORDINGLY, the Appeal is DENIED. The Decision dated June 29, 2022 of the Court of
Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 03145 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.

Accused-appellant XXX264352 is found GUILTY of RAPE. He is sentenced to reclusion

perpetua and ordered to PAY AAA264352 PHP100,000.00 as civil indemnity; PHP100,000.00 as moral
damages; and PHP100,000.00 as exemplary damages.

The monetary awards shall earn 6% interest per annum from finality of this Decision until fully
paid.

SO ORDERED.

Leonen, M.V. Lopez, J.Y. Lopez and Kho, Jr., JJ., concur.

Footnotes

* In line with Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015, as mandated by Republic Act No. 8353,
the names of the private offended parties, along with all other personal circumstances that may
tend to establish their identities, are made confidential to protect their privacy.

1. Rollo, pp. 5-6.

2. Id. at 11-23. Penned by Associate Justice Eleuterio L. Bathan and concurred in by Associate
Justices Bautista G. Corpin, Jr. and Mercedita G. Dadole-Ygnacio, Court of Appeals, Cebu City.

3. Id. at 12.

4. Id. at 12-13.

5. Id. at 13.

6. Id.

7. Id.

8. Id.

about:srcdoc Page 5 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

9. Id.

10. Id. at 13-14.

11. Id. at 25-30. Penned by Presiding Judge Walter G. Zorilla, Regional Trial Court, Branch 55,
____________, Negros Occidental.

12. Id. at 29-30.

13. Id. at 14.

14. CA rollo, pp. 18-34.

15. Id. at 76-90.

16. Rollo, pp. 11-23.

17. Id. at 22.

18. Id. at 16-21.

19. Id. at 5.

20. Id. at 38-40.

21. Id. at 33-35.

22. People v. XXX, 887 Phil. 734, 746 (2020) [Per J. Lazaro-Javier, First Division].

23. Records, p. 5.

24. People v. AAA, G.R. No. 247007, March 18, 2021 [Per C.J. Peralta, First Division].

25. People v. Regaspi, 768 Phil. 593, 598 (2015) [Per J. Peralta, Third Division].

26. People v. Moreno, 872 Phil. 17, 28 (2020) [Per J. Hernando, Second Division].

27. Rollo, pp. 19-20.

28. Article 266-B. Penalty. — Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished
by reclusion perpetua.

xxx xxx xxx

29. Rollo, p. 22.

about:srcdoc Page 6 of 7
G.R. No. 264352 | PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. XXX264352, accused-appellant. 9/16/24, 10:57 PM

30. Records, p. 12.

31. 783 Phil. 806, 848 (2016) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].

about:srcdoc Page 7 of 7