THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 232498. January 10, 2018.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,vs. RODELITO LLONA y ABRENCILLO, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated January 10, 2018, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 232498 (People of the Philippines vs. Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo). — The Court NOTES:
(1) the letter dated November 10, 2017 of P/Supt. I Roberto R. Rabo, Superintendent of the New Bilibid Prison, Bureau of Corrections, Muntinlupa City, confirming the confinement therein of accused-appellant since January 29, 2016;
(2) the Office of the Solicitor General's Manifestation and Motion in Lieu of Supplemental Brief dated November 21, 2017 stating that it is dispensing with the filing of a supplemental brief as the facts, issues and pertinent arguments involved in the present appeal have been succinctly discussed in its Brief for the Plaintiff-Appellee of December 27, 2016; and
(3) accused-appellant's Manifestation (in Lieu of Supplemental) dated November 28, 2017 stating that he repleads and adopts his brief as reply to the appellee's brief.
This is an appeal from the Decision 1 dated March 29, 2017 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07990 entitled "People of the Philippines v. Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo," which affirmed with modification the Judgment dated August 12, 2015 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Judicial Region, Branch 61-Gumaca, Quezon in Criminal Case No. 10190-G and Criminal Case No. 10191-G, finding accused-appellant Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo (Llona) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape under Article 266-A, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353.
In line with our ruling in People v. Cabalquinto, 2 the real name of the victim, as well as any information which tends to establish or compromise her identity shall be withheld. The initials AAA shall be used instead to represent the victim.
The Facts
Accused-appellant Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo (Llona) was charged in two separate Informations dated March 25, 2008 and January 29, 2008, respectively before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor. The accusatory portions read:
CRIMINAL CASE No. 10190-G
That on or about the January 14, 2008, at sometime in the evening, at x x x Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, by means of force, threats and intimidation, did then and there willfully, knowingly and feloniously have carnal knowledge of 9 year old [AAA], a female child, by then and there, removing her panties, applying the coconut oil to her vagina, and inserting his penis inside her vagina, without the consent of the said minor, and to her damage and prejudice.
That the accused threatened to kill the victim if she disclosed the incident to anyone.
CONTRARY TO LAW. 3
CRIMINAL CASE No. 10191-G
That on or about the January 15, 2008, at sometime in the evening, at x x x Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, by means of force, threats and intimidation, did then and there willfully, knowingly and feloniously have carnal knowledge of 9 year old [AAA], a female child, by then and there, removing her panties, applying the coconut oil to her vagina, and inserting his penis inside her vagina, without the consent of the said minor, and to her damage and prejudice.
That the accused threatened to kill the victim if she disclosed the incident to anyone.
CONTRARY TO LAW. 4
Upon arraignment on July 3, 2008, accused-appellant Llona entered a plea of not guilty. 5 Pre-trial conference was terminated on October 5, 2009. Trial on the merits thereafter ensued.
Sometime in the evening of January 14, 2008, while AAA was asleep with her younger sibling and mother, accused-appellant Llona, who was AAA's father, woke her and told her not to make any noise. 6 Accused-appellant Llona suddenly removed her panty and inserted his fingers inside her vagina. Thereafter, he threatened AAA not to tell anyone about the incident, otherwise, he will kill her. 7
The following evening, while AAA was asleep with her family, accused-appellant Llona once again woke her and applied coconut oil on AAA's vagina. He then removed his brief and inserted his penis in AAA's vagina. Accused-appellant Llona only stopped when AAA's younger sibling started to move. 8
AAA did not report the incident right away but she eventually revealed this to her grandmother. Her grandmother checked her vagina and saw blood stains in her panty.
On January 23, 2008, AAA was examined by Dr. Fe Rono Alinsod (Dr. Alinsod), Medico-Legal Officer. It was discovered during her examination that AAA's vagina had a slight redness, was positive for hymen tear, and admits of two fingers. 9 Thereafter, AAA's grandmother, accompanied by her aunt, reported the incident to the police station.
On March 25, 2008, accused-appellant Llona was charged with two counts of rape. Accused-appellant Llona denied the charges against him and claimed that the charge was concocted out of spite because AAA's mother was enraged that his cousin left the sister of AAA's mother. 10
The Ruling of the RTC
On August 12, 2015, the RTC rendered a Decision convicting accused-appellant Llona of two counts of rape. The RTC ruled that the prosecution was able to successfully prove accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The dispositive portion of the said Decision reads:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered against Rodelio Llona as follows:
1. GUILTY of Rape Through Sexual Assault in Criminal Case No. 10190-G. He is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from ten (10) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months of reclusion temporal, as maximum and ordered to pay his victim civil indemnity of P30,000.00 and exemplary damages of P30,000.00
2. GUILTY of Rape in Criminal Case No. 10191-G. He is hereby sentenced to suffer he (sic) penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay his victim civil indemnity of P75,000,00, moral damages of P75,000.00 and exemplary damages of P30,000.00
3. NOT GUILTY of Violation of Section 5(a) in Relation to Sec. 3(a) and 6(a) of RA 9262 in Criminal Case No. 10192-G for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
SO ORDERED. 11
The Ruling of the CA
In its assailed Decision dated March 29, 2017, the CA affirmed the Decision of the RTC. The CA gave credence to the testimony of AAA and ruled that AAA's testimony was unshaken by a grueling cross-examination and she remained consistent and steadfast in her assertions. The CA noted that the Information in Criminal Case No. 10190-G pertaining to the first rape incident on January 14, 2008, charged accused-appellant Llona with rape through carnal knowledge. 12 However, AAA related during the trial that the first rape incident was committed by the accused by inserting his fingers inside her vagina, thereby proving rape through sexual assault. 13 Consequently, since the charge in Criminal Case No. 10190-G is rape through carnal knowledge, accused-appellant Llona cannot be later found guilty of rape through sexual assault even though all the acts constituting rape through sexual assault were proven during the trial. 14 Nonetheless, accused-appellant Llona may be convicted of acts of lasciviousness, in view of the variance doctrine, embodied in Section 4, in relation to Section 5 of Rule 120 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. 15 The dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby PARTLY GRANTED. The Judgment in Criminal Case No. 10190-G and Criminal Case No. 10191-G, dated 12 August 2015 is accordingly modified as follows:
1. The accused-appellant Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 6 months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as maximum; and is further ORDERED to pay the victim AAA Php20,000.00 as civil indemnity; Php30,000.00 as moral damages; and Php10,000.00 as exemplary damages for Criminal Case No. 10190-G.
2. The accused-appellant Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo is sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility of parole, and is further ORDERED to pay the victim AAA Php100,000.00 as civil indemnity; Php100,000.00 as moral damages and Php100,000.00 as exemplary damages.
He is FURTHER ordered to pay interest on all damages awarded at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.
SO ORDERED. 16
The Issue
The pivotal issue in this case is whether the CA erred in partly affirming the Decision of the RTC that accused-appellant Llona was guilt of the crime of rape and acts of lasciviousness.
The Ruling of the Court
The appeal is unmeritorious.
At the outset, it must be pointed out that the accused-appellant Llona hinges his present appeal on the issue of credibility of the prosecution witness, AAA. It is well-settled that the trial court's assessment of the credibility of a witness is entitled to great weight particularly when affirmed by the CA. In People v. Abat, 17 the Court had the occasion to reiterate that:
This Court has time and again explained why the determination of a witness' credibility appropriately pertains to the trial court, to wit:
It is well settled that the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and to note their demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grilling examination.
It is also well-settled that the accused in a rape case may be convicted based solely on the testimony of the victim, provided that such testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. 18 In the instant case, the RTC and the CA found AAA's testimony to be straightforward and candid. Furthermore, in People v. Manuel, 19 this Court held:
Evidently, no woman, least of all a child, would concoct a story of defloration, allow examination of her private parts and subject herself to public trial or ridicule if she has not, in truth, been a victim of rape and impelled to seek justice for the wrong done to her being. It is settled jurisprudence that testimonies of child-victims are given full weight and credit, since when a woman or a girl-child says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed committed.
As to the defense of denial of accused-appellant Llona, it is well-settled that denial is an inherently weak defense and cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony of the witness. In order to merit credibility, denial must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability which herein accused-appellant Llona failed to show. 20 The positive and categorical assertions of AAA that accused-appellant Llona raped her are entitled to greater weight than accused-appellant Llona's self-serving defenses of denial and ill-motive.
However, We agree with the findings of the CA that accused-appellant Llona cannot be convicted of rape through sexual assault in Criminal Case No. 10190-G because the charge against him pertains to rape through sexual intercourse. Notwithstanding the prosecution's failure to prove accused-appellant Llona's guilt for rape, We find that there is sufficient evidence to convict him of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code. 21 A charge of acts of lasciviousness is necessarily included in a complaint for rape. The elements of acts of lasciviousness are: (1) that the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done under any of the following circumstances: (a) by using force or intimidation, (b) when the offended woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or (c) when the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age; and (3) that the offended party is another person of either sex. 22
As correctly found by the CA, all the elements of acts of lasciviousness were present in the incident that transpired on January 14, 2008 and were sufficiently proven during the trial. As such, accused-appellant Llona may be convicted of the lesser offense of acts of lasciviousness.
Moreover, We agree with the CA that accused-appellant Llona cannot be convicted of qualified rape. Section 8, Rule 110 23 of the Rules of Court has expressly required that qualifying and aggravating circumstances be specifically alleged in the information. Consequently, the qualifying circumstance of relationship, even if established during trial, could not affect the criminal penalty of the accused by virtue of its non-allegation in the information. 24 Accused-appellant Llona could not be convicted of the graver offense of qualified rape, although proven, because relationship was neither alleged nor necessarily included in the information. 25 Accordingly, the accused was properly convicted by the CA for simple rape.
Anchored on the evidence extant on record, the Court finds no reason to disturb the findings of the CA. The decisions of the trial court and the CA must therefore be sustained. However, in conformity with this Court's recent pronouncement in People v. Jugueta, 26 the CA decision is modified to reduce the amount of award for civil indemnity for the crime of simple rape to PhP75,000.00; moral damages in the amount of PhP75,000.00; and exemplary damages in the amount of PhP75,000.00.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court of Appeals Decision dated March 29, 2017 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07990 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION on the award of damages. Accused-Appellant Rodelito Llona y Abrencillo is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Simple Rape under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, without eligibility for parole and to pay AAA civil indemnity in the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00), moral damages in the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00),and exemplary damages in the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00), with interest on all damages awarded at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of the Court's resolution until full payment.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Penned by Associate Justice Marlene Gonzales-Sison and concurred in by Associate Justice Ramon A. Cruz and Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting.
2. G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, 502 SCRA 419.
3. CA rollo, p. 17.
4. CA rollo, pp. 17-18.
5.Id.
6.Rollo, p. 4.
7.Id.
8.Id., p. 5.
9.Id., p. 5.
10.Id.
11. CA rollo, pp. 30-31.
12.Rollo, p. 13.
13.Id.
14.Id., p. 14.
15.Section 4.Judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof. — When there is variance between the offense charged in the complaint or information and that proved, and the offense as charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved. (4a)
Section 5.When an offense includes or is included in another. — An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information, constitute the latter. And an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form a part of those constituting the latter. (5a)
16.Rollo, p. 17.
17.People v. Abat, G.R. No. 202704, April 2, 2014.
18.People of the Philippines v. Welmo Linsie y Binevidez, G.R. No. 199494, November 27, 2013, citing People v. Penilla, G.R. No. 189324, March 20, 2013, 694 SCRA 141, 149.
19. 358 Phil. 664,674 (1998).
20.People of the Philippines v. Diosdado Tubat y Versoza, G.R. No. 183093, February 1, 2012, citing People v. Francisco, G.R. No. 141631, 4 April 2003.
21.People of the Philippines v. Ignacio Poras, G.R. No. 177747, February 16, 2010.
22.Id., citing People v. Mingming, G.R. No. 174195, December 10, 2008.
23. Sec. 8. Designation of the offense. The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense given by the statute, aver the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances. If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it.
24.People of the Philippines v. Dadulla y Capanas, G.R. No. 172321, February 9, 2011.
25.Id., citing People v. Flores, Jr., G.R. No. 128823-24, December 27, 2002.
26. G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016.