FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 194835. June 13, 2013.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ALLAN VILLAVERDE, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated June 13, 2013 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 194835 (People of the Philippines v. Allan Villaverde). — We resolve the appeal, filed by accused Allan Villaverde (respondent), from the Decision dated 23 June 2010 issued by the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03755. 1
The RTC Ruling
In its Decision dated 12 November 2008, 2 the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Calauag, Quezon, Branch 63, convicted appellant of statutory rape committed against his 9 nine-year old daughter, AAA, in March 2005. Despite the admission by appellant that his daughter was nine years old at the time the crime was committed, the prosecution still presented the Certificate of Live Birth of AAA during trial at the RTC. The certificate showed that the victim was born on 22 October 1995, and that appellant was the father. 3 The RTC gave much evidentiary weight to the positive testimony of AAA and disregarded the inconsistencies therein. It applied the rule that testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, because youth and immaturity are badges of truth. 4 Thus, it found the prosecution to have successfully discharged its burden of proving the guilt of appellant beyond reasonable doubt. It rejected his defense of denial for being weak and unsubstantiated by evidence. Appellant was thus sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death and to pay a fine of P75,000 as civil indemnity, P75,000 as moral damages, and P25,000 as exemplary damages. 5 DcCIAa
The CA Ruling
On intermediate appellate review, the CA affirmed the RTC's Decision convicting the accused. The CA refused to give credence to his alibi; he had failed to prove that he was somewhere else at the time the crime took place. It held that the quantum of evidence needed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt was amply borne out. 6 Thus, the RTC Decision, which had sentenced appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death and awarded various damages to the victim, was affirmed in toto by the appellate court. 7
We now rule on the final review of the case.
Our Ruling
We deny the appeal and affirm in all respects the assailed CA Decision.
After an exhaustive review of the records of the case, we see no reason to reverse or modify the findings of the RTC on the credibility of AAA's testimony, less so in the present case, in which its findings were affirmed by the CA. Appellant's defense of alibi and denial is weak and cannot succeed to overturn his conviction. We find that the appellate court correctly ruled that the accused failed to prove that he was so geographically removed from the place where the crime took place that it was impossible for him to have committed the crime. It pointed out that the house of the maternal grandparents where the victim stays is in the same barangay, where the appellant's house is also situated. 8 He failed to present concrete proof that it was impossible for him to have been in another place when the crime happened. The victim's credible testimony and the evidence presented during trial were a sufficient basis for the CA to sustain the RTC's Decision convicting the accused. TSacID
Appellant argued that his daughter, AAA, fabricated the story against him upon the prodding of her maternal grandparents. He alleged that they harbored a grudge against him for marrying their daughter, the victim's mother. We agree with the ruling of the CA that found his allegation to be improbable. 9 Indeed, the victim, being of tender age, could not have concocted a complaint as serious as rape and undergone the rigors, humiliation and trauma of a public trial based solely on that motive. Her detailed and straightforward testimony on her ordeal at the hands of her father belied the aspersions he had cast on her credibility.
Further, this Court concurs with the findings of the CA and the RTC that rape was consummated despite the Medical Certificate showing that her hymen was intact at the time of examination. In People v. Opong, 10 we ruled thus:
An intact hymen does not negate a finding that the victim was raped, and a freshly broken hymen is not an essential element of rape.
In People v. Gabayron, we sustained the conviction of accused for rape even though the victim's hymen remained intact after the incidents because medical researches show that negative findings of lacerations are of no significance, as the hymen may not be torn despite repeated coitus. It was noted that many cases of pregnancy had been reported about women with unruptured hymens, and that there could still be a finding of rape even if, despite repeated intercourse over a period of years, the victim still retained an intact hymen without signs of injury.
In People v. Capt. Llanto, citing People v. Aguinaldo, we likewise 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 remain intact despite repeated sexual intercourse. We elucidated that the strength and dilatability of the hymen varies from one woman to another, such that it may be so elastic as to stretch without laceration during intercourse; on the other hand, it may be so resistant that its surgical removal is necessary before intercourse can ensue. TEAICc
The RTC and the CA correctly imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8355, or the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, in relation to R.A. 9346, which prohibits the imposition of the death penalty.
We also affirm the CA's grant of the award to the victim in the amount of P75,000 as civil indemnity and P75,000 as moral damages, as these amounts are in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. However, we increase the award of exemplary damages from P25,000 to P30,000, also in conformity with prevailing jurisprudence. Interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum is also imposed on all the damages awarded in this case, from the date of finality of this judgment until the damages will have been fully paid. 11
WHEREFORE, the 23 June 2010 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03755 is hereby AFFIRMED in all respects. Appellant Allan Villaverde is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of statutory rape and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death, without eligibility for parole. He is ordered to pay AAA P75,000 as civil indemnity, P75,000 as moral damages, and P30,000 as exemplary damages. Interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum is imposed on all the damages awarded in this case from the date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Penned by then CA Associate Justice Portia Alino-Hormachuelos, and concurred in by Associate Justices Japar B. Dimaampao and Jane Aurora C. Lantion; rollo, pp. 2-16.
2.Penned by Presiding Judge Manuel G. Salumbides in Criminal Case No. 4663-C; CA rollo, pp. 62-75.
3.Rollo, p. 71.
4.Id. at 73-74.
5.Id. at 74-75.
6.Id. at 9.
7.Id. at 16.
8.Id. at 13.
9.Supra note 8.
10.People v. Opong, G.R. No. 177822, 17 June 2008.
11.People v. Relanes, G.R. No. 175831, 12 April 2011.