THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 224592. February 13, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.ARNEL CABANAG, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated February 13, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 224592 (PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, v. ARNEL CABANAG, accused-appellant). — This resolves the Appeal assailing the Court of Appeals December 7, 2015 Decision 1 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01242-MIN. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of Arnel Cabanag (Cabanag) for the crime of rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code in relation to Republic Act No. 7610.
Cabanag was charged in an Information filed before the Regional Trial Court of Cagayan de Oro City. The accusatory portion of the Information read:
That sometime at early dawn of March 16, 2008 at [redacted], Misamis Oriental, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge with one AAA, a minor, 15 years of age, against her will and without her consent and to her damage and prejudice.
CONTRARY TO and in violation of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code as amended and in relation to R.A. 7610. 2
Upon arraignment, Cabanag pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. Trial then ensued. 3
The prosecution presented as witnesses AAA, her mother BBB, Police Officer 2 Haydee Macas (PO2 Macas), and Dr. Rubee Ann Go-Gotil (Dr. Go-Gotil), who testified to the following version of the facts. CAIHTE
On March, 15, 2008, AAA, then 15 years old, accompanied her parents to a fiesta somewhere in Misamis Oriental. They left their house at 3:00 p.m. and arrived at the house of BBB's friend 10 minutes later. After eating, BBB already wanted to leave, but AAA was convinced to stay by her friend, CCC, for the festivities. BBB allowed AAA to stay behind. 4
With 10 other companions, AAA and CCC went to watch a basketball game. At about 5:00 p.m., they watched a cockfight. By 7:00 p.m., they joined a benefit dance at the basketball court. 5
It was about midnight when AAA suddenly had an upset stomach. She asked CCC to accompany her home, but eventually went home alone as CCC still wanted to stay. On her way, she could no longer bear the pain in her stomach so she ran to a nearby hill, where she relieved herself. 6
Suddenly, a man appeared in front of her. AAA tried to stand, but the man dragged her down and removed her pants and underwear while taking his own short pants off. He then inserted his penis into AAA's vagina, pushing and pulling while choking her to prevent her from shouting. He also threatened her not to shout or he would kill her. 7
After the man had done the dastardly act, AAA pleaded for her life. The man then allowed AAA to dress up, but warned her not to tell anyone about what happened or else he would kill her parents. AAA, still in shock, went downhill and proceeded to CCC's house. There, her friends kept asking her what had happened until she finally told them that she was raped by a man who turned out to be Cabanag. 8
BBB learned from CCC and another neighbor, a certain Indo, that her daughter AAA was raped. BBB then reported the incident to the barangay captain and filed a Criminal Complaint against Cabanag. 9
On March 17, 2008, AAA was physically examined by Dr. Go-Gotil, who found that her breasts were swollen and her genitalia had old and healed lacerations at the three (3) and six (6) o'clock positions. 10
Cabanag solely testified in his defense, denying the accusations against him. He stated that on March 15, 2008, he went to a church seminar attended by seven (7) participants. The seminar ended at about 2:00 p.m., after which he stayed at a friend's house until 2:30 a.m. the next day. He returned home at dawn and met about 15 teenagers at a crossing. They were all headed the same direction, so he walked with them. Among the teenagers were his neighbors Dodong, Archie, and Abay. Upon reaching home, he went to sleep with his wife and two (2) children. 11
Later, at about 3:30 a.m., Cabanag's neighbors, Abay and Archie, went to his house looking for him. Cabanag's wife, noticing that they were drunk, told them that he was not there. Another neighbor, Loloy, went to his house an hour later to inform him that BBB's daughter was raped. 12
At 5:00 a.m., Cabanag woke up confronted by his Aunt Gloria, who accused him of raping AAA. The day after, he left for Sugbongcogon, Misamis Oriental to go to his mother and stay away from AAA's family. 13
Three (3) years later, on September 27, 2011, Cabanag was arrested at Sta. Cruz in Sugbongcogon and has been detained since then. 14
In its October 14, 2013 Decision, 15 the Regional Trial Court found AAA credible, observing that her testimony was "natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.'' 16 As opposed to Cabanag's testimony, which merely consisted of denial and alibis, the trial court said that sufficient evidence was established to convict Cabanag of rape. 17
The dispositive portion of the trial court's Decision read:
WHEREFORE, the foregoing premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused ARNEL CABANAG, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua.
Under the prevailing jurisprudence, the accused is hereby ordered to pay "AAA" the amount of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages. DETACa
SO ORDERED. 18
Like the trial court, the Court of Appeals, in its December 7, 2015 Decision, 19 found AAA credible and characterized her testimony as "clear and untainted and could only have been given by one who was subjected to such a traumatic ordeal." 20 Further, it was supported by Dr. Go-Gotil's findings of old and healed lacerations in AAA's genitalia. 21 Cabanag's testimony "cannot prevail over the positive, spontaneous[,] and straightforward identification by AAA of [Cabanag] as the malefactor." 22
The dispositive portion of the Court of Appeals Decision read:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is DENIED. The October 14, 2013 Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 22, Cagayan de Oro City, in Criminal Case No. 2008-327, finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of Rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended and in relation to Republic Act 7610 is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED. 23
Cabanag filed a Notice of Appeal, 24 which the Court of Appeals gave due course in its April 6, 2016 Resolution. 25 It also ordered its Judicial Records Division to elevate the records of the Appeal to this Court. 26
In its July 7, 2016 Resolution, 27 this Court noted the records forwarded by the Court of Appeals, and informed the parties to file their supplemental briefs.
On September 6, 2016, the Office of the Solicitor General, on behalf of plaintiff-appellee People of the Philippines, filed a Manifestation and Motion, 28 stating that it would no longer file a supplemental brief. A similar Manifestation with Motion was filed by accused-appellant, praying that he be excused from filing his supplemental brief and instead consider the arguments discussed in his Appellant's Brief before the Court of Appeals. 29 The Manifestations were noted by this Court in its October 5, 2016 Resolution. 30
In his Appeal Brief, accused-appellant maintains that the trial courts "overlooked some vital evidence that could have worked [in his favor]." 31 First, there was no evidence that he choked AAA while raping her since Dr. Go-Gotil found no bruises on AAA's neck. 32 Second, AAA testified that she recognized her assailant under the moonlight. However, PO2 Macas testified that AAA did not know her assailant; it was Junel Alvia (Alvia), AAA's companion in the interview at the police station, who allegedly saw the incident and identified accused-appellant as the assailant. 33 Lastly, the lacerations in AAA's hymen were erroneously appreciated as evidence. If there was a full penetration, as AAA declared, the lacerations should have been fresh, not old and healed as Dr. Go-Gotil found two (2) days after the alleged incident. 34 These allegedly show that accused-appellant Cabanag's guilt was not proven with moral certainty. 35
On the other hand, plaintiff-appellee maintains that the prosecution proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It counters that the absence of bruises on AAA's neck was allegedly because Dr. Go-Gotil only examined her breasts and genitalia. 36 Moreover, that the hymenal lacerations were not fresh does not negate rape. 37 With respect to AAA allegedly failing to identify accused-appellant as the assailant, plaintiff-appellee points to PO2 Macas' testimony during trial, in which she said that it was AAA, not Alvia, who identified accused-appellant as the assailant. 38
The sole issue for resolution is whether or not accused-appellant Arnel Cabanag is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape.
This Court affirms the conviction of accused-appellant, as the prosecution established with moral certainty that he had indeed raped AAA.
Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code partly provides:
Article 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. — Rape is Committed —
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation; aDSIHc
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
The elements of rape under Article 266-A (1) are that: (1) the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) such act was accomplished through force, threat, or intimidation, or when the victim is deprived of reason or unconscious, or when the victim is under 12 years old. 39
All the elements of the crime were established by the prosecution. In a categorical and straightforward manner, AAA recounted how accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of her against her will. She had just relieved herself from an upset stomach when he dragged her to satisfy his lust. Employing force and threats, he ravished her while choking and threatening to kill her. He also told her not to tell anyone what he did to her, or else he would kill her and her parents. AAA's testimony read:
Q: Why did you file a complaint against the accused in this case Arnel Cabanag?
A: Because he raped me.
Q: When did it happen?
A: Just in between the sitio of [redacted.]
Q: When was that?
A: March 16.
Q: What year?
A: 2008.
Q: How old are you then?
A: 15.
Q: Before that incident, you said that you were raped by accused, where were you that time?
xxx xxx xxx
A: Then we went to a disco (a benefit dance)[.]
Q: Where was that held?
A: At the basketball court.
Q: What time were you there?
A: That disco starts at 7:00 o'clock in the evening.
Q: Until what time you stayed (sic) there for the fiesta?
A: We stayed there until 11:00 o'clock to 12:00 o'clock.
Q: What happened after 11:00 to 12:00 o'clock?
A: My stomach suddenly got upset.
Q: And what did you do then?
A: It was very painful that I cannot understand what I will do at that time, so I tried to ask CCC if we could go home but unfortunately she does not want to go home yet.
Q: Where was the house of CCC located?
A: At [redacted], just in front of our house.
Q: How about your other companions, where were they from?
A: My other friends came and they were also my neighbors, but Nico and Jeboy are from the other place.
Q: After you asked CCC that you wanted to go home because of your upset stomach, what happened then? ETHIDa
A: Since CCC does not want to go home yet, so (sic) I ran and Jeboy went after me.
Q: And what happened after Jeboy ran after you?
A: Jeboy called me asking me to wait for CCC so that she will accompany me in going home.
Q: All of them?
A: Yes.
Q: Around what time was that?
A: Around 1:00 o'clock dawn.
Q: What mode of transportation did you use?
A: We walked.
Q: And what happened while you were walking?
A: My stomach was so very painful and I could not bear it so I told CCC that I will go ahead from them so I ran.
Q: What happened after that?
A: I ran because I could no longer bear the pain and CCC held me and also Nico but I did not mind them.
Q: Then, what happened?
A: In between [redacted,] there was a mountain and so I went there in order to have my disposals.
Q: And what happened then?
A: When I was through and about to stand up, I saw Arnel Cabanag.
Q: What happened after you saw him?
A: I was scared and when I was about to stand up, he pulled me.
Q: What happened after Arnel Cabanag pulled you?
A: He went on top of me.
Q: What happened then?
A: He raped me.
Q: What did he do when you said that he raped you?
A: He removed my pants and he also removed his shorts.
Q: What happened then?
A: He removed my underwear and inserted his penis into my vagina.
Q: And what happened after he inserted his penis into your vagina?
A: He made a push and pull motion.
Q: Did you shout for help?
A: I could not shout because he choked me and he told me that he will kill me if I shout.
Q: What happened after that?
A: He choked me and made a push and pull motion and I asked for pity on him.
PROS. WAGA:
We would like to put it on record your honor that when the victim was asked what happened to her, she was in tears.
Q: How many times did he do that to you? cSEDTC
A: Only once.
Q: Did you shout for help?
A: I could not shout because he choked me.
Q: What did he do after he inserted his penis into your vagina and made a push and pull motion?
A: Then after that, he did not stop and still on top of me and again made a push and pull motion and I beg (sic) him not to kill me and he told me that he was a rebel and I thought it was true because just below our place there was a battle.
Q: And what happened after he threatened you?
A: I pleaded for him and he told me "Ok you can dressed (sic) up and go, but do not tell your parents because I will kill them all." And I dressed up and went down from the mountain and I was shocked when I came home. 40
Accused-appellant failed to refute AAA's testimony. His alibi — that he went to a church seminar at 2:00 p.m. on March 15, 2008 then stayed at a friend's house until 2:30 a.m. the next day — was never corroborated by anyone. He never presented in court the people who could have supported his defense; namely, the other church seminar attendees or the friend with whom he stayed so late into the night.
More indicative of accused-appellant's guilt is his leaving for Sugbongcogon the day after the incident "to stay away from the family of AAA[.]" 41 This is obviously flight, defined as "the evading of the course of justice by voluntarily withdrawing oneself in order to avoid arrest or detention or the institution or continuance of criminal proceedings." 42 While "flight must not always be attributed to one's consciousness of guilt" 43 as "[c]ulprits behave differently and even erratically in externalizing and manifesting their guilt[,]" 44 the circumstances show that accused-appellant actively tried to hide and evade possible arrest. Indeed, he was arrested only on September 27, 2011, more than three (3) years after the alleged incident.
Finally, this Court emphasizes that neither the presence nor the absence of hymenal lacerations indicates rape. 45 The hymen breaks for varied reasons the same way that it can remain intact despite repeated sexual intercourse. 46 Here, even if no fresh hymenal lacerations were found on AAA a day after the incident, it does not mean that she was not raped.
With the prosecution discharging its burden of establishing the elements of rape, accused-appellant was correctly convicted and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 47 The damages awarded are affirmed, except for the amount of exemplary damages, which is increased from P30,000.00 to P75,000.00. 48 Therefore, AAA is entitled to: (1) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; (2) P75,000.00 as moral damages; and (3) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, all to earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Resolution until full payment. 49
WHEREFORE, this Court ADOPTS the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court of Appeals in its December 7, 2015 Decision in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01242-MIN. Accused-appellant Arnel Cabanag is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of RAPE under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The assailed Decision is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that private complainant, AAA, is deemed entitled to: (1) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as civil indemnity; (2) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages; and (3) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as exemplary damages. 50 SDAaTC
All damages awarded shall be subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Resolution until its full satisfaction. 51
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 3-11. The Decision was penned by Associate Justice Oscar V. Badelles and concurred in by Associate Justices Romulo V. Borja and Pablito A. Perez of the Twenty-First Division, Court of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City.
2.Id. at 4.
3.Id.
4.Id. at 4.
5.Id.
6Id.
7.Id. at 4-5.
8.Id. at 5.
9.Id.
10.Id. at 5 and 9.
11.Id. at 5.
12.Id. at 6.
13.Id.
14.Id.
15. CA rollo, pp. 23-32. The Decision was penned by Presiding Judge Richard D. Mordeno of Branch 22, Regional Trial Court, Cagayan de Oro City.
16.Id. at 31.
17.Id. at 31-32.
18.Id. at 32.
19.Id. at 3-11.
20.Id. at 7.
21.Id. at 9.
22.Id. at 10.
23.Id.
24.Id. at 12-14.
25. CA rollo, p. 79.
26.Id.
27.Rollo, pp. 17-18.
28.Id. at 19-24.
29. Id. at 26.
30. Id.
31. CA rollo, p. 17.
32. Id. at 17-18.
33. Id. at 18-19.
34. Id. at 19-20.
35. See RULES OF COURT, Rule 133, sec. 2.
36. CA rollo, p. 49.
37. Id. at 49-51.
38. Id. at 51-52.
39. People v. Joson, 751 Phil. 450, 456 (2015) [Per J. Perez, First Division].
40. Rollo, pp. 7-9.
41. CA rollo, p. 16.
42. People v. Mores, 712 Phil. 480, 495 (2013) [Per J. Leonardo-de Castro, First Division] citing People v. Camat, et al., 692 Phil. 55 (2012) [Per J. Leonardo-de Castro, First Division].
43. Id. at 492.
44. Id. at 495 citing People v. Asilan, 685 Phil. 633 (2012) [Per J. Leonardo-de Castro, First Division].
45. People v. Llamo, 380 Phil. 759, 773-774 (2000) [Per Curiam, En Banc].
46. People v. Añonuevo, 419 Phil. 519, 531 (2001) [Per J. Puno, En Banc] citing People v. Aguinaldo, 375 Phil. 295 (1999) [Per J. Puno, En Banc]; People v. Alberca, G.R. No. 217459, June 7, 2017, 827 SCRA 1, 14 [Per J. Tijam, Third Division].
47. REV. PEN. CODE, Art. 266-B, par. 1 provides:
Article 266-B. Penalties. — Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. (Emphasis in the original)
48. People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 849 (2016) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].
49. Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267, 283 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].
50. People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 849 (2016) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].
51. Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267, 283 (2013) [Per J. Peralta, En Banc].