FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 260021. November 29, 2022.]
MELANY B. GARIN, petitioner, vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated November 29, 2022 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 260021 (Melany B. Garin v. People of the Philippines). — The petitioner's Motion for an Extension of fifteen (15) days within which to file a petition for review on certiorari and to assign docket number is GRANTED, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period.
Considering the allegations, issues and arguments presented in the submissions of petitioner Melany B. Garin (petitioner), the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition for failure of petitioner to sufficiently show any reversible error in the challenged Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR. No. 42065 dated 16 December 2021.
Section 10 (a), Article VI of Republic Act No. (RA) 76102 provides that "[a]ny person who shall commit any other acts of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or be responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the child's development x x x shall suffer the penalty of prisión mayor in its minimum period." Appropriately, child abuse is defined in Section 3 (b), Article I, thus:
Section 3. Definition of Terms. —
xxx xxx xxx
(b) "Child abuse" refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the following:
(1) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;
(2) Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being;
(3) Unreasonable deprivation of his [or her] basic needs for survival, such as food and shelter; or
(4) Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured child resulting in serious impairment of his [or her] growth and development or in his [or her] permanent incapacity or death.
Verily, a person who commits an act that debases, degrades, or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being, whether habitual or not, can be held liable for above-mentioned provisions of RA 7610. While it may be true that not every instance of laying of hands on the child would constitute child abuse, petitioner's intention can be inferred from the manner in which she committed the act complained of. It bears stressing that coercion and intimidation is not a material element for an accused to be held culpable under this section. 3
On this score, petitioner's act of forcing the victim, AAA, 4 and his classmates to place in their mouths pieces of trash, consisting of scraps of paper, pencil shavings, dirt, and candy wrappers from the classroom's dustpan, undoubtedly debased, degraded and demeaned their intrinsic worth and dignity as children. Petitioner's deplorable act is manifestly prejudicial to AAA's normal development, in light of his mental capacity and emotional maturity as a minor. 5 In fact, the incident caused AAA to suffer not only from lead poisoning, but likewise from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, as diagnosed by Dr. Cornelio Banaag. 6 As eloquently pronounced by the CA, no self-respecting human being would voluntarily place pieces of garbage in his or her mouth unless unduly coerced to do so. The gravity of petitioner's action becomes all the more pronounced considering that the incident occurred in class and by reason of her moral ascendancy as AAA's teacher.
Ultimately, a perusal of the submissions shows that there is no clear reason to disturb the findings of the lower courts. AAA's testimony was clear, positive, and direct. To stress, the RTC judge's assessment of the witnesses' credibility is given great weight and respect, especially on appeal, since he or she had the advantage of actually examining both object and testimonial evidence, including the demeanors of the witnesses. 7
As to the penalty, the Court finds no error in the imposition made by the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. The imposable penalty is prisión mayor in its minimum period, or six years and one day to eight years. In applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum of the indeterminate sentence should be anywhere within the range of prision correccional, in its maximum period, i.e., four years, two months and one day to six years. Meanwhile, the maximum term, in the absence of any mitigating and aggravating circumstances, shall be within the medium period of the imposable penalty of prisión mayor in its minimum period, or six years, eight months, and one day to seven years and four months. Thus, the penalty imposed by the trial court, and affirmed by the CA, that is, four years, nine months and 11 days of prision correccional as minimum, to six years, eight months and one day of prision mayor, as maximum, is proper. 8
However, anent the award of damages, the Court deems it proper to modify the CA's award pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence. In line with Rosaldes v. People, 9 We find that the CA erroneously deleted the awards of exemplary and temperate damages. Thus, petitioner is ordered to indemnify AAA the following amounts: P20,000.00 as moral damages, P20,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P20,000.00 as temperate damages. A fine of P15,000.00 is also imposed pursuant to Section 31 (f) of RA 7610. 10
All damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid. 11
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED. The Decision dated 16 December 2021 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR. No. 42065 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Accordingly, petitioner Melany B. Garin is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Child Abuse under Section 10 (a) of Republic Act No. 7610, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of four years, nine months and 11 days of prision correccional as minimum, to six years, eight months and one day of prision mayor as maximum. Petitioner is likewise ordered to pay AAA the amounts of P20,000.00 as moral damages, P20,000.00 as exemplary damages, P20,000.00 as temperate damages, and P15,000.00 as fine.
All damages awarded shall earn legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from finality of this Resolution until fully paid.
The petitioner is required to SUBMIT, within five (5) days from notice hereof, the soft copies in compact disc, USB or e-mail containing the PDF files of the signed motion for extension of time to file a petition for review on certiorari and to assign docket together with the petition, pursuant to A.M. Nos. 10-3-7-SC and 11-9-4-SC.
SO ORDERED." Marquez, J., on official business.
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
By:
MARIA TERESA B. SIBULODeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 62-86.
2.n Entitled "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES." Approved on 17 June 1992.
3. See Dela Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 245516, 14 June 2021.
4. The identity of the victim or any information which could establish or compromise her identity, including the names of her immediate family are withheld pursuant to SC Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015.
5. See Dela Cruz v. People,supra.
6.Rollo, pp. 72-82.
7.Fernandez v. People, 843 Phil 745, 756 (2018).
8. See Dela Cruz v. People,supra,People v. XXX, G.R. No. 252351, 07 July 2021 and Delos Santos v. People, G.R. No. 227581, 15 January 2020.
9. See Dela Cruz v. People,supra citing Rosaldes v People, G.R. No. 173988, 8 October 2014, 745 Phil. 77-93 (2014) and Malcampo-Repollo v. People, G.R. No. 246017, 25 November 2020 citing Rosaldes v. People, G.R. No. 173988, 8 October 2014, 745 Phil. 77-93 (2014).
10. See People v. XXX,supra.
11. See Dela Cruz v. People,supra.
n Note from the Publisher: Copied verbatim from official document. Missing Footnote Reference.