SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 237981. April 8, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.______________, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated08 April 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 237981 (People of the Philippines vs. ______________)
The Court ADOPTS the factual findings and conclusions of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 09085, for being in accordance with the evidence and the law.
AAA credibly testified that appellant forced himself upon her and succeeded in inserting his penis in her vagina: first, when she was only seven years old, and second, when she was just ten years old. Her narration was so replete with details which she could not have known had she not actually experienced them in the hands of her own father. Suffice it to state that no daughter, specially one as young as AAA, would charge her own flesh and blood with such heinous crime as rape if it were not true. 1 HTcADC
Appellant's speculation that his daughter may have been angry with him for having spanked and scolded her in front of her friends is devoid of any probative weight. For sure, it cannot negate the victim's positive identification of appellant as the person who forced himself upon her and sexually ravished her not once, but twice.
It is well-settled that the trial court's factual findings on the credibility of witnesses are accorded the highest weight and respect by the appellate courts. This is because the trial court is able to observe up close the manner by which these witnesses testified, as well as their demeanor while testifying. 2 Indeed, in the absence of a clear showing that the trial court overlooked or misconstrued some material facts or committed grave abuse of discretion, the appellate court will not disturb such factual findings. 3 So must it be.
As for civil indemnity and damages, the Court of Appeals correctly applied People v. Jugueta4 to the present case. Thus, the Court of Appeals' awards of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity; P100,000.00 as moral damages; and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages are in order. These amounts shall earn 6% interest per annum from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.
ACCORDINGLY, the appeal is DISMISSED and the Decision dated November 28, 2017, AFFIRMED. CAIHTE
SO ORDERED. (Perlas-Bernabe, J., on leave)"
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.People of the Philippines v. Oligario Balonzo, 560 Phil. 244 (2007).
2.Spouses Guidangen v. Wooden, 666 SCRA 119 (2012).
3.People v. Antonio Guihama, 452 Phil. 824 (2003).
4. G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016.