THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 197359. October 8, 2014.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FEDERICO ABIVA, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated October 8, 2014, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 197359 (People of the Philippines vs. Federico Abiva). — On appeal is the December 13, 2010 Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed in toto the judgment 2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 71, of Iba, Zambales, finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Section 5 (b) of Republic Act No. 7610 (R.A. 7610), otherwise known as Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.
Briefly, the factual antecedents of this case are as follows: Appellant Federico Abiva is the father of 7-year-old AAA 3 based on her birth certificate. 4 One afternoon in April 2005, while AAA and appellant were in their house, appellant ordered AAA to masturbate his penis. He then placed his penis inside AAA's mouth and asked her to lick his balls. Not contented, appellant even pricked AAA's vagina with a matchstick covered with cotton. 5
The same acts were repeated on April 10, 2005. While inside their house, appellant, who was then only wearing a sando shirt without any underwear, placed his penis in AAA's mouth and ordered her to lick his balls. Appellant ejaculated inside AAA's mouth. After ordering AAA to gargle, appellant inserted a matchstick covered with cotton inside her vagina, causing AAA to feel pain. Appellant also ordered AAA to masturbate his penis for three times. AAA reported the incident to her mother BBB. Subsequently, AAA, assisted by BBB, reported the incident to the authorities at the municipal hall. 6
Dr. Nida Fabunan, the government physician who examined AAA, found that AAA's vagina was normal-looking and had no laceration, bleeding or hematoma, but she found that AAA had urinary tract infection which could have been caused by the cotton inserted into her vagina. 7
Two Informations, docketed as Crim. Case Nos. RTC-4436-I and RTC-4437-I, for Acts of Lasciviousness in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. 7610 were filed against appellant. Crim. Case No. RTC-4436-I charged appellant for his actions on April 10, 2005 while the other criminal case charged him for what he did to AAA prior to April 10, 2005.
For his defense, appellant denied the accusation against him and tried to give an alibi. He explained that the only reason why AAA charged him is because he often scolded her. He also claimed that he was at the parking area of the tricycles infront of the Municipal Building, working as a nighttime tricycle driver, at around 10:00 p.m. or the time when the incident on April 10, 2005 happened. 8
The RTC found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of one count of Acts of Lasciviousness in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. 7610 and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Appellant was convicted for what he did to AAA during one afternoon prior to April 10, 2005. However, he was acquitted in Crim. Case No. RTC-4436-I for there was no evidence proving that similar molestation was committed in the evening of April 10, 2005. Appellant was ordered to pay AAA the amount of P15,000 as moral damages and a fine of P15,000. The RTC found AAA's narration to be credible, honest and consistent. It noted that she testified in a straightforward and coherent manner on how appellant sexually abused her in the absence of her mother. 9
The CA as aforesaid affirmed in toto the decision of the RTC. 10 The CA held that the RTC was correct in applying Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. Jurisprudence has shown that the law covers not only a situation in which a child is abused for profit but also one in which a child, through coercion or intimidation, engages in any lascivious conduct. 11
The Court affirms appellant's conviction. We have carefully reviewed the records of this case and the parties' submissions and find no cogent reason to disturb the finding of the RTC and the CA as to appellant's guilt. There is no showing that either the RTC or the CA committed any error in their findings of fact especially as to AAA's credibility. It has been consistently held that in criminal cases, the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose conclusion thereon deserves much weight and respect because the judge had the direct opportunity to observe said witnesses on the stand and ascertain if they were telling the truth or not. Absent any showing in this case that the lower courts overlooked, misunderstood or misappreciated substantial facts and circumstances, which if considered, would change the result of the case, this Court gives deference to the trial court's appreciation of the facts and of the credibility of witnesses, especially since this Court's own review of the records leads it to conclude that AAA's testimony meets the test of credibility. 12IacHAE
However, the Court notes that the RTC and the CA erred in the designation of the crime committed and in convicting appellant for acts of lasciviousness as the crime committed is more properly called rape by sexual assault. Nonetheless, the Court notes that the RTC correctly imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua on appellant. The crime proven during trial and as alleged in the information 13 is rape by sexual assault in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. 7610 and aggravated by relationship. The real nature of the criminal charge is determined not from the caption or preamble of the information, or from the specification of the provision of law alleged to have been violated, which are mere conclusions of law, but by the actual recital of the facts in the complaint or information. 14 The information sufficiently averred that appellant put his penis into his daughter AAA's mouth and he even inserted a matchstick into her vagina.
Thus, as the crime is rape by sexual assault, we deem it proper to increase the amount of civil indemnity to P30,000, and to further award moral and exemplary damages amounting to P30,000 each in line with recent jurisprudence. 15 Likewise, consistent with prevailing policy, we impose interest at the rate of 6% per annum on all damages awarded in this case from the finality of this Resolution until fully paid.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The December 13, 2010 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 04100 affirming the conviction of appellant Federico Abiva is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. Appellant is hereby found guilty of the crime of rape by sexual assault. The award of civil indemnity is likewise increased to P30,000 and P30,000 moral damages and P30,000 exemplary damages are likewise awarded. Furthermore, the Court hereby imposes interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all the damages awarded in this case from the finality of this Resolution until fully paid.
With costs against the appellant. (Jardeleza, J., no part, due to his prior action as Solicitor General; Brion, J., designated Member per Raffle dated September 17, 2014.)
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 2-13. Penned by Associate Justice Sesinando E. Villon, with Associate Justices Normandie B. Pizarro and Amy C. Lazaro-Javier concurring. The assailed decision was rendered in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 04100.
2. CA rollo, pp. 22-30. Penned by Presiding Judge Consuelo Amog-Bocar.
3. The victim's real name and personal circumstances or any other information tending to establish or compromise her identity as well as those of her immediate family, are withheld per People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703, 709 (2006).
4. CA rollo, p. 26; records, p. 9.
5. Id.
6. Id. at 23.
7. Id. at 24.
8. Id. at 25.
9. Id. at 27-30.
10. Rollo, p. 13.
11. Id. at 9, citing People v. Larin, 357 Phil. 987, 998 (1998).
12. People v. Obina, G.R. No. 186540, April 14, 2010, 618 SCRA 276, 280-281.
13. The Information in Crim. Case No. RTC-4437-I reads:
That in or about the early part of the year 2005 before the 10th day of April 2005, in [XXX], Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with lewd design, thru coercion, influence or for other consideration, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commit lascivious acts on his 7-year old daughter [AAA], by ordering her to masturbate his penis, put his penis into her mouth, lick his organ with said accused also touching the vagina of [AAA] with a match stick covered with cotton, to the damage and prejudice of said minor [AAA].
CONTRARY TO LAW. (Records, p. 2.)
14. Lacson v. Executive Secretary, 361 Phil. 251, 279 (1999).
15. People v. Alfonso, G.R. No. 182094, August 18, 2010, 628 SCRA 431, 452-453.