People v. Dongallo

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 220147. March 27, 2019.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.ROGER DONGALLO, accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 27 March 2019which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 220147 — PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, versus ROGER DONGALLO, accused-appellant.

After a careful review of the records of the case and the issues submitted by the parties, the Court finds no error committed in the Decision 1 dated March 25, 2015 of the Court of Appeals (CA), Nineteenth Division, in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01753. The facts, as borne out by the records, sufficiently support the conclusion that accused-appellant is indeed guilty of three counts of Rape charged against him. The issues and matters raised before the Court, the same ones as those raised in the CA, there being no supplemental briefs filed, were sufficiently addressed and correctly ruled upon by the CA.

It is well-settled that in the absence of facts or circumstances of weight and substance that would affect the result of the case, appellate courts will not overturn the factual findings of the trial court. 2 Thus, when the case pivots on the issue of the credibility of the victim, the findings of the trial courts necessarily carry great weight and respect as they are afforded the unique opportunity to ascertain the demeanor and sincerity of witnesses during trial. 3 Here, after examining the records of this case, the Court finds no cogent reason to vacate the RTC's 4 appreciation of the evidence, which was affirmed in toto by the CA.

In the same vein, accused-appellant's defenses of alibi and denial cannot outweigh the candid and straightforward testimony of private complainant AAA 5 (private complainant) that he indeed had sexual intercourse with her numerous times against her will. The Court has oft pronounced that both denial and alibi are inherently weak defenses which cannot prevail over the positive and credible testimony of the prosecution witness that the accused committed the crime. Thus, as between a categorical testimony which has the ring of truth on the one hand, and a mere denial and alibi on the other, the former is generally held to prevail. 6

Further, the continuing case law is that for the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place when the crime was committed, but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime or its immediate vicinity through clear and convincing evidence. 7 EcTCAD

In the present case, the RTC and the CA both correctly held that the accused-appellant was within the immediate vicinity of the place of the crime. As the RTC held, the distance between the house he lived in — where the rapes happened — and Dongsung Corporation, where he was supposedly on August 2 and August 29, 1999, was merely one (1) kilometer. Hence, it was not impossible for him to be at the place of the crime at the time it happened. Similarly, as the RTC also found, the barrio fiesta he supposedly attended on August 16, 1999 was held also in Catmon, Cebu although it was in a different barangay. It was likewise therefore not physically impossible for him to be at the scene at the time the rapes happened. His defense of alibi thus fails to convince compared with the positive identification by the private complainant that it was him who committed the rapes.

However, the Court modifies the penalty imposed by the RTC, as modified by the CA. Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, 8 the award of civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages should be increased to P100,000.00 each for each count of Rape. The legal interest is also modified to six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Resolution until full satisfaction. 9

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The Court hereby ADOPTS the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Decision dated March 25, 2015 of the Court of Appeals, Nineteenth Division, in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01753. The Decision finding accused-appellant Roger Dongallo GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of Rape, defined and punished under Article 266-A, paragraph 1 (a) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. He is ORDERED to pay the private complainant ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00) as civil indemnity, ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00) as moral damages, and ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P100,000.00) as exemplary damages for each count of Rape. All monetary awards shall earn interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1.Rollo, pp. 4-17. Penned by Associate Justice Ma. Luisa C. Quijano-Padilla, with Associate Justices Edgardo L. Delos Santos and Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob concurring.

2.People v. Gerola, G.R. No. 217973, July 19, 2017, 831 SCRA 469, 478.

3.People v. Aguilar, 565 Phil. 233, 247 (2007).

4. See Decision dated March 26, 2012 of the Regional Trial Court, Seventh Judicial Region, Danao City, Branch 25, in Criminal Case Nos. DNO-2250, DNO-2250-A and DNO-2250-B, penned by Assisting Judge Sylva G. Aguirre Paderanga; CA rollo, pp. 49-54.

5. 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 initial shall, instead, be used, in accordance with People v. Cabalquinto (533 Phil. 703 [2006]) and Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017.

6.People v. Piosang, 710 Phil. 519, 527 (2013).

7.People v. Desalisa, 451 Phil. 869, 876 (2003).

8.People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016).

9.Id. at 854.