People v. Daet

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 223152. January 19, 2018.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.JOEL DAET, accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJanuary 19, 2018which reads as follows: HTcADC

"G.R. No. 223152 (People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joel Daet, Accused-Appellant).

Before Us is an Appeal filed by accused-appellant Joel Daet which seeks to assail the Decision 1 dated September 30, 2015 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA G.R. CEB-CR HC No. 01890, which affirmed the judgment 2 dated February 17, 2014 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 13, Culasi, Antique in Criminal Case No. S-639, convicting the accused-appellant of the crime of rape under Article 266-A (1) (b) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended by Republic Act (RA) No. 8353.

Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code provides that the crime of rape is committed by a man having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: (a) through force, threat or intimidation; (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.

Clearly, Article 266-A (1), as amended by RA No. 8353 provides for two circumstances of carnal knowledge with a woman with mental disability. Subparagraph (b) refers to a woman who is deprived of reason and subparagraph (d) refers to a woman who is demented.

In the case of People v. Monticalvo, 3 We explained that the term "deprived of reason" has been construed to encompass those suffering from mental abnormality, deficiency or retardation. The term "demented" on the other hand, means having dementia, which Webster defines as mental deterioration; also madness, insanity. 4 Hence, carnal knowledge of a woman who suffers from mental retardation shall fall under subparagraph (b), and not under subparagraph (d).

At any rate, the fact of rape was sufficiently established. It must be noted that the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, gave full credence to AAA's 5 testimony that the accused-appellant was the perpetrator of the crime. On this note, We emphasize that the manner of assigning values to declarations of witnesses on the witness stand is best and most competently performed by the trial judge, who has the unique and unmatched opportunity to observe the witnesses and assess their credibility. 6 Hence, in the absence of any showing that the trial court overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight or substance which would otherwise affect the result of the case, the findings of the trial court are entitled to the highest degree of respect. 7

Thus, AAA's positive identification of accused-appellant should prevail over accused-appellant's uncorroborated defenses of denial and alibi.

As to the penalty and award of damages, We affirm the ruling of the CA that the proper imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua under Article 266-B of the RPC. 8 We likewise affirm the award of civil indemnity in the amount of PhP75,000. However, We modify the award of moral damages and exemplary damages in the amount of PhP75,000 each in line with recent jurisprudence. 9

In conformity with current policy, We also impose on all monetary awards for damages, interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this judgment until fully paid. 10

WHEREFORE, premises considered, We resolve to DENY the instant appeal. The Decision dated September 30, 2015 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CEB-CR HC No. 01890 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS.

Accused-appellant JOEL DAET is GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the crime of rape and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

He is further ordered to pay AAA the following: (1) PhP75,000 as civil indemnity; (2) PhP75,000 as moral indemnity; and (3) PhP75,000 as exemplary damages.

An interest at the rate of 6% per annum is imposed on all damages awarded from date of finality of this judgment until fully paid. aScITE

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1. Penned by Associate Justice Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap and concurred in by Associate Justices Gabriel T. Ingles and Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob; Rollo, pp. 1-19.

2. Penned by Judge Romeo Casalan; CA rollo, pp. 31-41.

3. 702 Phil. 643 (2013).

4.Id. at 657.

5. Pursuant to the ruling of this Court in People v. Cabalquinto (533 Phil. 703 [2006] and A.M. No. 04-11-09-SC dated September 19, 2006), the real name of the victim, her personal circumstances and other information which tend to establish or compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate family or household members, shall not be disclosed to protect her privacy and fictitious initials shall, instead, be used.

6.People v. Magayon, 640 Phil. 121, 133 (2010), citing People v. Fernandez, 550 Phil. 358, 367, (2007).

7.People v. Magayon, supra at 134.

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

9.People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016, 788 SCRA 331.

10.People v. Veloso, 703 Phil. 541, 544, 556 (2013).