FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243656. October 13, 2021.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.XXX, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedOctober 13, 2021which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243656 (People of the Philippines v. XXX). — This is an Appeal 1 from the Decision 2 dated June 11, 2018 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09363, affirming with modification the Decision 3 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch·50, Villasis, Pangasinan (RTC) dated April 10, 2017 in Criminal Case Nos. V-1413 to 1415, finding accused-appellant XXX guilty of one (1) count of Acts of Lasciviousness in Criminal Case No. V-1413 and two (2) counts of Statutory Rape in Criminal Case Nos. V-1414 & 1415.
It must be underscored that the Court is not a trier of facts; thus, it must be able to rely on the findings of fact by the trial court based on its direct observation of the witnesses' testimonies in open court. 4 It is settled that "factual findings of the trial court and its evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on appeal, unless the trial court is shown to have overlooked, misapprehended, or misapplied any fact or circumstance of weight and substance." 5 Such rule is more stringently applied if the appellate court has concurred with the trial court. 6
In this case, there appears to be no cogent reason to disturb the RTC's and the CA's above-mentioned findings and conclusion, considering that both courts have uniformly given scant consideration to XXX's bare alibi and denial, while unanimously finding the testimonies of the prosecution worthy of belief. Verily, the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt the existence of the elements of the crimes charged.
Anent the incidents of rape, the defense did not dispute the fact that AAA 7 was only 11 years old at the time of the incidents. In fact, her Certificate of Live Birth, 8 which was proffered into evidence and presented in open court, was never questioned by the defense. Anent the alleged sexual intercourse, AAA's testimony is worthy of credence. In People v. Piosang, 9 this Court held that "when the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity." 10 It also bears stressing that AAA's testimony has been corroborated on all points by the testimonies of her mother, BBB, Dr. Brenda Tumacder, and SPO1 Sheila de Leon.
Similarly, this Court concurs with the RTC and the CA that all the elements of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), in relation to Section 5 (b), Article III of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610, have been sufficiently established in the case at bench. Aside from positively identifying XXX as her perpetrator, AAA was able to candidly narrate how XXX brought her to the nearby city cemetery and thereupon, embraced her, kissed her on the lips, and touched her breasts. Similar to rape cases, in prosecutions of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused. 11
Worse, XXX misused his ascendancy and took advantage of AAA's youth and naivete by coercing her into silence, threatening to kill her if she exposed him. As iterated in Quimvel v. People, 12 "[w]hen the victim of the crime is a child under twelve (12) years old, mere moral ascendancy will suffice." 13
Prescinding from the above considerations, XXX was correctly charged and convicted of one (1) count of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC, in relation to Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610.
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Court resolves to DISMISS the instant appeal and AFFIRM WITH MODIFICATIONS the Decision dated June 11, 2018 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09363, finding accused-appellant XXX GUILTY of two (2) counts of Statutory Rape and one (1) count of Acts of Lasciviousness, in relation to Section 5 (b), Article III of Republic Act No. 7610, for failure to show that the Court of Appeals committed reversible error in finding him guilty of the crimes charged.
In Criminal Case No. V-1413 for one (1) count of Acts of Lasciviousness, this Court modifies the penalty. Accordingly, accused-appellant XXX is SENTENCED to suffer the indeterminate penalty of twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal in its minimum period, as minimum, to sixteen (16) years, five (5) months, and nine (9) days, as maximum. Accused-appellant is further DIRECTED to PAY the victim AAA the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity; P50,000.00 as moral damages; and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages.
In Criminal Case Nos. V-1414 and V-1415 for two (2) counts of rape, this Court sustains the penalty meted out by the Court of Appeals as well as the damages awarded. Accused-appellant XXX is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua and is ORDERED to PAY the victim, AAA, the amounts of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 as moral damages; and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages.
Legal interest of six percent (6%) per annum is imposed on all damages awarded from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.
SO ORDERED."Lopez, M., J., on official leave.
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. 17-18.
2. Penned by Associate Justice Danton Q. Bueser, with Associate Justices Mariflor P. Punzalan-Castillo and Henri Jean Paul B. Inting (now an Associate Justice of this Court) concurring; id. at 2-16.
3. CA rollo, pp. 49-62.
4.People v. Reyes, 714 Phil. 300, 306 (2013).
5.People v. De Jesus, 695 Phil. 114, 122 (2012).
6.People v. Barcela, 734, Phil. 332, 343 (2014).
7. The identity of the victim or any information to establish or compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes"; Republic Act No. 9262, "An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes"; Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known as the "Rule on Violence Against Women and Their Children," effective November 15, 2004; People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703 (2006); and Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017, Subject: Protocols and Procedures in the promulgation, Publication, and Posting on the Websites of Decisions, Final Resolutions, and Final Orders Using Fictitious Names/Personal Circumstances.
8. Records, Criminal Case No. V-1413, p. 6.
9. 710 Phil. 519 (2013).
10.Id. at 526. (Emphasis ours)
11.Awas v. People, 811 Phil. 700, 707-708 (2017).
12. 808 Phil. 889 (2017).
13.Id. at 931.