SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 220753. November 7, 2018.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,vs. MARLON EMPENADO, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 07 November 2018 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 220753 — PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,versusMARLON EMPENADO,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 February 26, 2015 rendered by the Court of Appeals, Eighteenth (18th) Division (CA), in CA GR CEB CR. HC. No. 01657. The facts, as borne out by the records, sufficiently support the conclusion that accused-appellant Marlon Empenado (accused-appellant) is indeed guilty of the crime of Rape. 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 defense of impossibility of commission of the crime cannot outweigh the positive testimony of private complainant AAA 5 (private complainant) that he indeed had sexual intercourse with her against her will. It is also well-settled that rape is not always committed in seclusion, but also in places where other people may be around, such as along a roadside, inside school premises, a park, or even in an occupied room, as "lust is no respecter of time and [place]," and "rape defies constraints of time and space." 6
Here, as correctly observed by the CA, it was established that accused-appellant dragged private complainant from the roadside to an uninhabited area in the forest, punched her abdomen twice which rendered her unconscious, undressed her and inserted his penis into her vagina after she regained consciousness. Thus, the CA did not err in ruling that the guilt of accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt of the offense charged had been completely proven.
However, the Court modifies the monetary awards imposed by the CA. Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, 7 the award of civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages should be increased to P75,000.00 each. Moreover, legal interest is hereby imposed on all monetary awards at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Resolution until full satisfaction. 8
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 assailed Decision dated February 26, 2015 of the Court of Appeals, Eighteenth (18th) Division, in CA GR CEB CR. HC. No. 01657. The Decision finding accused-appellant Marlon Empenado guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Simple Rape under Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. He is ordered to pay the private complainant 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. 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." (REYES, J., JR., J., designated additional Member per S.O. No. 2587 dated August 28, 2018)
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 Gabriel T. Ingles, with Associate Justices Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap and Jhosep Y. Lopez 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 April 15, 2013 of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch 24, in Criminal Case No. CBU-85055, penned by Acting Presiding Judge James Stewart Ramon E. Himalaloan; CA rollo, pp. 28-34.
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. Regalado, 793 Phil. 493, 503 (2016), citing People v. Ramon, 378 Phil. 542, 557 (1999), further citing People v. Sangil, Sr., 342 Phil. 499, 507 (1997); People v. Regaspi, 768 Phil. 593, 599 (2015), citing People v. Pareja, 724 Phil. 759, 777 (2014).
7.People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016).
8.Id. at 854.