FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 251017. July 6, 2021.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.SALVADOR EBRADA y VALENZUELA, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJuly 6, 2021which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 251017 (People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, v. Salvador Ebrada y Valenzuela, accused-appellant).
After careful review of the records, the Court resolves to DISMISS the appeal against the January 31, 2019 Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09837. The CA affirmed the March 13, 2017 Judgment 2 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 09 in Criminal Case No. 11-283924, finding Salvador Ebrada y Valenzuela (accused-appellant) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape under paragraph 1 (d), Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). HTcADC
Accused-appellant heavily relies on the medico-legal finding of the absence of injury or laceration in AAA's 3(victim) genitalia. However, the Court has repeatedly held that the absence of laceration is not sufficient proof that accused-appellant did not commit rape. In People v. Alberca, 4 the Court reiterated that the absence of hymenal laceration is of no moment. Contrary to accused-appellant's theory, the same does not negate the fact of rape, as a broken hymen is notan essential element of rape. In fact, this Court has, in a previous case, affirmed the conviction of the accused for rape despite the absence of laceration on the victim's hymen, since medical findings suggest that it is possible for the victim's hymen to stay intact despite repeated sexual intercourse. 5
Moreover, even if the Court disregards the medico-legal certificate, the same would still not be sufficient to acquit accused-appellant. We have repeatedly held that the medical report is by no means controlling. A medical examination of the victim is not indispensable in the prosecution for rape, and no law requires a medical examination for the successful prosecution thereof. The medical examination of the victim or the presentation of the medical certificate is not essential to prove the commission of rape, as the testimony of the victim alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict the accused of the crime. The medical examination of the victim as well as the medical certificate is merely corroborative in character. 6
Accordingly, what is crucial is that the victim's testimony meets the test of credibility, which serves as the basis for accused-appellant's conviction. 7 Consequently, accused-appellant failed to destroy the credibility of the victim in positively identifying him as the perpetrator of the gruesome acts. The Court had been consistent in giving credence to testimonies of child victims, especially in sensitive cases of rape, as no young girl would concoct a tale of defloration, allow the examination of her private parts, and undergo the expense, trouble and inconvenience, not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial, unless she was, in fact, raped. 8
Further, accused-appellant likewise failed to substantially corroborate his averment that he was, in fact, at the Land Transportation Office, and that it was physically impossible for him to be at the place and time of the incident. Thus, in the light of the positive identification of accused-appellant as the victim's perpetrator of rape, his defense of alibi and denial cannot be sustained.
The modification by the CA of the award of exemplary damages, by increasing it from P30,000.00 to P75,000.00, is deemed proper and in accordance with recent jurisprudence on the matter.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. The January 31, 2019 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09837, affirming the March 13, 2017 Judgment of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 09 in Criminal Case No. 11-283924, which found Salvador Ebrada y Valenzuela GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape under paragraph 1 (d), Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, is AFFIRMED.
Accused-appellant is SENTENCED to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and is ORDERED to PAY the victim the amounts of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as civil indemnity, Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages, and Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as exemplary damages, plus interest at the rate of six percent ( 6%) per annum, reckoned from the finality of this Resolution until full payment.
SO ORDERED."
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
By:
MARIA TERESA B. SIBULODeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 3-14; penned by Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, with Associate Justices Manuel M. Barrios and Perpetua T. Atal-Paño, concurring.
2. CA rollo, pp. 45-52; penned by Presiding Judge Jacqueline S. Martin-Balictar.
3. The true name of the victim bas been replaced with fictitious initials in conformity with Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 (Subject: Protocols and Procedures in the Promulgation,Publication, and Posting on the Websites of Decisions, Final Resolutions, and Final Orders UsingFictitious Names/Personal Circumstances). The confidentiality of the identity of the victim is mandated by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,Exploitation and Discrimination Act); R.A. No. 8505 (Rape Victim Assistance and Protection Actof 1998); R.A. No. 9208 (Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003); R.A. No. 9262 (Anti-ViolenceAgainst Women and Their Children Act of 2004); and R.A. No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice andWelfare Act of 2006).
4. 810 Phil. 896 (2017).
5.Id. at 907.
6.People v. Manaligod, 831 Phil. 204, 213 (2018).
7.People v. Belen, 803 Phil. 751, 769 (2017).
8.Id.