SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 222493. September 16, 2020.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,vs. DDD, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated16 September 2020which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 222493 (People of the Philippines v. DDD). — The Court NOTES the letter dated September 6, 2020 of CCInsp. Joel R. Calvelo, Acting Superintendent, New Bilibid Prison-North, Muntinlupa City, confirming the confinement of accused-appellant in the said institution on November 29, 2013.
This is an appeal from the Decision 1 dated February 23, 2015 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 06570 which affirmed the Joint Decision 2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 172, ___________ convicting accused-appellant of the crime of Rape defined and penalized under Article 266-A (1) and Article 266-B, respectively, of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
Version of the Prosecution
AAA * is the daughter of BBB. Accused-appellant is the live-in partner of BBB. AAA treated accused-appellant as her stepfather.
In the early morning of October 24, 2011, AAA, who was then 16 years old, was sleeping beside her sister when accused-appellant came and touched her breast. AAA resisted by pushing accused-appellant, but the latter persisted and threatened to kill her if she continued to resist. Accused-appellant undressed AAA and placed himself on top of her. He inserted his penis into AAA's vagina and made a push and pull movement. 3 During the course of the rape, BBB suddenly arrived and accused-appellant immediately dressed up. BBB only told accused-appellant not do it again, while she scolded AAA and slapped her for engaging in a sexual intercourse with accused-appellant. 4
According to AAA, accused-appellant started raping her since she was 10 years old and BBB knew about it. Further, accused-appellant and BBB were using illegal drugs, more particularly shabu. There were instances when BBB and accused-appellant were high on drugs; and BBB would go walking outside of the house, while accused-appellant would rape her. 5 The rape incidents affected AAA's studies as AAA was forced to be absent from her school several times. The school's Guidance Counselor talked with AAA and the latter revealed her harrowing experiences in the hands of accused-appellant. 6 The Guidance Counselor sought the DSWD's assistance. The DSWD brought AAA to the __________ Police Station. AAA was subjected to medical examinations and the doctor found injuries in her arm which were indicative of a suicide attempt. Further, AAA's hymen showed healed hymenal lacerations at 3 o'clock position which could have been caused by blunt force or penetrating trauma. 7
Version of the Defense
Accused-appellant denied the accusations against him. He alleged that he was not at their house at _________________ when the alleged rape took place. He was a pedicab driver plying the route of Monumento to Malabon. He worked at this route from around 9:00 p.m. of October 24, 2011 until 7:00 a.m. of October 25, 2011. He asserted that AAA made up her rape story because she got mad at them for selling a pig, but did not part to her some of the proceeds of the sale. 8
The defense also presented Nancy Gutierrez (Gutierrez) who testified that she was the owner of the pedicab being driven by accused-appellant. According to her, accused-appellant took the pedicab at around 7:00 p.m. of October 24, 2011 and returned it at around 9:00 a.m. of October 25, 2011. 9
Ruling of the RTC
On November 20, 2013, the RTC convicted accused-appellant of Rape. 10 It ruled that the prosecution was able to establish that on October 24, 2011, accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA through the use of force and intimidation. Accused-appellant's moral ascendancy and influence over AAA satisfy the elements of force and intimidation. Furthermore, AAA's testimony that accused-appellant is a frequent user of illegal drugs was confirmed by the drug test conducted on him. 11
Ruling of the CA
On February 23, 2015, the CA affirmed accused-appellant's conviction. It held that the fact that AAA had healed hymenal lacerations gives credence to her testimony that she had been raped by accused-appellant. The ill motive being imputed against AAA is not supported by any evidence on record. 12 Further, accused-appellant's defense of denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive declaration of AAA that it was accused-appellant who raped her. 13
Hence, this appeal.
Issue
Whether the CA erred in affirming accused-appellant's conviction.
The Court's Ruling
Accused-appellant was charged with the crime of Rape under Article 266-A (1) of the RPC. The case revolves around matters of credibility of witnesses. It is axiomatic that factual findings of trial courts deserve to be respected when no glaring errors bordering on a gross misapprehension of the facts, or where no speculative, arbitrary and unsupported conclusions, can be gleaned from such findings. 14 In rape cases particularly, the conviction or acquittal of the appellant most often depends almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant's testimony. Her testimony is most vital and must be received with the utmost caution. Once found credible, her lone testimony is sufficient to sustain a conviction. 15
After a careful scrutiny of the testimonies of AAA and accused-appellant, the Court finds AAA's testimony to be credible, truthful, and logical. She recounted the circumstances surrounding the rape incident that occurred on October 24, 2011 without inconsistencies, or contradictions in its material points and unshaken by the tedious and grueling cross-examination. Her declarations revealed the logical circumstances and gave no impression whatsoever that they were a mere fabrication. She was able to candidly testify at the witness stand, viz.:
On direct examination:
Q: So, will you tell us what this unusual thing is?
A: He touched my breasts and undressed me.
Q: So you are referring to a "he," who are you referring to?
A: My stepfather.
xxx xxx xxx.
Q: Now, you said ______ touched your breasts and undressed you. And, what did you do, AAA?
A: I was resisting and I was trying to push him.
Q: And what did he tell you, if any?
A: He threatened me that he will kill me if I will tell to anyone about the incident.
Q: After he told you about this thing, what did he do to you?
A: He inserted his penis into my vagina.
xxx xxx xxx. 16
Q: Now, is this the first time that ______, your Papa did these things to you?
A: No sir.
Q: So, I know that this is hard but could you recall how old were you the first time he raped you?
A: I was 10 years old, sir.
Q: And in what instance would he rape you?
A: At times that I was asleep in our house and when my mother was using a stone (nagamit ng bato) and she was outside of the house.
Q: AAA, could you tell us an instance where your mother took shabu and he raped you?
A: Kung pano po sila gumagamit? Kung gumagamit po sila?
Q: I will just rephrase the question. You said nila. Who would use shabu with your mother?
A: My stepfather, and sometimes my aunt and uncle. 17
xxx xxx xxx.
Q: And what usually happens when your mother gets scored with shabu?
A: Bangag na bangag po sya and she is always walking.
Q: Where will your mother walk?
A: Outside and would try to look for my money to buy again another shabu.
xxx xxx xxx.
Q: And what will ______ do inside the house while your mother is away?
A: When my mother was still there, he pretended to drink coffee and then later he will do something.
xxx xxx xxx.
Q: And could you describe what is that he was doing to you?
A: He was raping me. 18
On cross-examination:
Q: When ______ touched your breasts, you stated that you fight?
A: Yes, ma'am.
Q: How did you fight?
A: I resisted and he threatened me.
Q: How did he threatened you?
A: That he will kill me if I will tell anyone about it.
xxx xxx xxx
Q: And this is not the only time ______ tried to have sex with you?
A: Yes, ma'am. 19
The foregoing testimony of AAA contains badges of truth and sincerity. It was spontaneous and did not show any signs of fabrication. AAA proved to be very consistent in narrating her ordeal in the hands of accused-appellant, her stepfather. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. 20 Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. 21
Moreover, AAA's allegation that she was raped was corroborated by the findings 22 of Dr. Renee Joy Peralta-Neri that the hymen of AAA had healed lacerations at 3 o'clock position which meant that the injury could have been caused by blunt force or penetrating trauma. 23 It is well-settled that when a rape victim's testimony on the manner she was defiled is straightforward and candid, and is corroborated by the medical findings of the examining physician as in this case, the same is sufficient to support a conviction for rape. 24
Accused-appellant's defense of denial and alibi cannot overcome the candid and straightforward testimony of AAA of the circumstances surrounding her defilement. The testimony of Gutierrez does not support accused-appellant's alibi as she had no knowledge of accused-appellant's whereabouts after he took the pedicab at 7:00 p.m. of October 24, 2011 until he returned it the following morning of October 25, 2011. Moreover, accused-appellant admitted that his route in driving the pedicab was only twenty minutes away from their house in ______________. Thus, it was not physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time of the rape incident.
In sum, the crime of Rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution, through AAA's testimony as corroborated by the doctor's medical findings, had ably proved that accused-appellant had carnal knowledge with AAA with the use of threat and intimidation.
Anent the penalty, the CA correctly affirmed the RTC's imposition of the penalty of reclusion perpetua because the crime committed is Simple Rape under Article 266-A (1) (a) of the RPC. No evidence was presented to prove that accused-appellant is the step-father of AAA. Based on the findings of the RTC, accused-appellant is only a common-law spouse of BBB.
However, to conform with existing jurisprudence, 25 the damages awarded must be modified. For Simple Rape, the damages to be awarded are as follows: P75,000.00 as moral damages, P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision dated February 23, 2015 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 06570 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that accused-appellant is ORDERED to pay private complainant P75,000.00 as moral damages, P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum reckoned from the finality of this resolution until full payment.
SO ORDERED." (BALTAZAR-PADILLA, J., on leave).
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 2-17; penned by Associate Justice Isaias P. Dicdican and with Associate Justices Elihu A. Ybañez and Victoria Isabel A. Paredes.
2. CA rollo, pp. 20-29; penned by Judge Nancy Rivas-Palmones.
* In People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703 (2006) the Court resolved to withhold the real name of the victim-survivor and shall use fictitious initials instead to represent her. Likewise, the personal circumstances of the victims-survivors or any other information tending to establish or compromise their identities, as well those of their immediate family or household members, shall not be disclosed. Thus, the name of the victim and her immediate family members shall appear as "AAA" and "BBB" and so forth.
3. CA rollo, p. 62.
4.Id.
5.Id. at 63.
6.Id.
7.Id. at 87-88.
8.Rollo, p. 7.
9.Id. at 8.
10. CA rollo, p. 29.
11.Id. at 28-29.
12. CA rollo, pp. 123-124.
13.Rollo, pp. 11-12.
14.People vs. Bayan, 741 Phil. 716, 727 (2014).
15.People v. Caratay, 374 Phil. 590, 601 (1999).
16. TSN March 23, 2012, records, pp. 5-6.
17.Id. at 10-11.
18.Id. at 11-12. Italics provided.
19.Id. at 18.
20.People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, March 12, 2019.
21.Id.
22. Records, p. 11.
23.Rollo, pp. 5-6.
24.People v. Bagsic, 822 Phil. 784, 797 (2017), citing People v. Soria, 698 Phil. 676, 689 (2012).
25.People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016).