People v. XXX

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 248365. October 6, 2021.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,vs. XXX, 1accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedOctober 6, 2021which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 248365 (People of the Philippines v. XXX). — Before Us is an ordinary appeal, seeking the reversal of the Court of Appeals' (CA) Decision 2 in CA-G.R. CEB CR-HC No. 02226 dated January 31, 2019, which affirmed with modification the Decision 3 in Criminal Case No. 3173 dated February 11, 2016 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Abuyog, Leyte, Branch 10, finding accused-appellant XXX guilty of Rape. The accusatory portion of the Information states:

That on or about the month of August 2011 in the ___________, Province of Leyte, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the said accused who is the stepfather of the victim, by force, threat, intimidation and taking advantage of the tender age of 11 year old "AAA" did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge to said "AAA" and made her his sexual toy without the latter's consent and against her will, which sexual abuses are condition prejudicial to the latter's development and best interest.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 4

Upon arraignment on August 16, 2012, XXX pleaded not guilty 5 to the offense charged. Thereafter, pre-trial and trial ensued.

The facts, as established by the prosecution, and as culled from the CA decision are as follows:

The prosecution presented two (2) witnesses, namely: 1) private complainant AAA; and 2) BBB, the elder sister of the private complainant.

xxx xxx xxx

AAA, the victim in this case, was only eleven (11) years old when she was raped. She was living with her mother and the accused-appellant, who is her mother's live-in partner, XXX.

Sometime in August 2011, AAA was sleeping on her bed when, around midnight, she was roused from her sleep when she felt that someone was touching her private parts. When she opened her eyes, she saw XXX removing her short pants and panties. XXX also removed his short pants and brief and lay on top of AAA. AAA wanted to shout, but XXX threatened to kill all her siblings if she would do so. She just cried silently. Her mother was sound asleep because she had a drinking spree with her friends earlier that night.

AAA then felt that something hard and hot was inserted into her vagina. She felt pain as accused-appellant was thrusting his penis into her vagina in a push-and-pull movement until something came out of XXX's penis. AAA testified that the thrusting went on for quite a while.

AAA kept to herself the horrible incident until February 2012 when she was able to talk to her elder sister, CCC, who was staying in Manila. At that time, AAA was left under the care of her elder siblings in _______________ because her mother had to attend to their sick grandmother. At one point, AAA had the opportunity to talk to CCC when the latter called up through cellular phone [of] their brother, DDD. AAA was crying while she narrated to CCC the sexual molestation that happened to her. CCC called up one of their siblings, BBB, who brought AAA at the _______________ for medical examination. The Medico-Legal Certificate shows that AAA suffered laceration on her right labia minora. Thereafter, AAA]and BBB went to the Women's and Children's Concern Division at the _______________ where they reported the incident and where AAA executed her Sworn Statement. 6

XXX who is the lone witness for the defense, interposed the denial. 7 He testified that he knew AAA because she is the daughter of his common-law wife, who has long been a widow. 8 According to XXX, he and the AAA's mother have been living together since 2009 in _______________, while AAA was living with her elder sister in _______________. 9 He testified that while he and AAA's mother have been living together, there was never a time when AAA stayed with them in _______________. He believed that AAA accused him of raping her because she wanted him to be imprisoned. 10 Further, he claimed that AAA and her siblings did not like him, even if AAA, herself called him "Tatay __________." 11 He said that they even called him "Bungaw" (crazy). 12 He also testified he and AAA's mother do not have common children, and as of the date of his testimony, they were still living together. 13

On February 11, 2016, the RTC issued a Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, this Court finds [XXX] guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without benefit of parole. He is further condemned to indemnify the [AAA] the amount of [P]75,000.00 as civil indemnity, [P]50,000.00 as moral damages, and [P]30,000.00 as exemplary damages. All damages shall earn an interest of 6% per annum from the finality of this judgment up to its full satisfaction.

SO ORDERED. 14

In convicting XXX for rape, the RTC gave full weight and credit to AAA's positive and straightforward testimony. Her testimony was also corroborated by the medical findings of the doctor, which showed that when AAA was examined, there was a healed laceration in her genitalia (labia minor). 15

The RTC also found that XXX perpetrated the crime of rape by the use of force, threat and intimidation. 16 XXX threatened AAA that she and her siblings would be killed if she tells anybody about the incident. 17 Nevertheless, the RTC ruled that since the prosecution has established thru the presentation of AAA's Certificate of Live Birth before the RTC, that she was only 11 years old when she was raped, there was no need to prove that sexual intercourse with AAA was done by force, threat and intimidation. 18 Sexual intercourse with a girl below 12 years old constitutes statutory rape. 19

Moreover, the RTC found out that the crime committed against AAA falls within the ambit of Section 5, Article III of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610, the elements of which are:

1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.

2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse.

3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age. 20

The RTC concluded that XXX's guilt has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. As a consequence, XXX should be meted the appropriate penalty. Under Article 266-B of the RPC in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610. It decreed that the penalty imposable for the crime of rape committed by a common-law spouse of the parent of the victim is death penalty. 21 Since death penalty is already proscribed by R.A. No. 9346, the penalty to be imposed shall be reclusion perpetua.

XXX filed his appeal with the CA. Thereafter XXX and the prosecution filed their respective Briefs.

On January 31, 2019 the CA issued its assailed Decision affirming XXX's conviction. The dispositive portion of the Decision reads:

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The assailed Judgment dated 11 February 2016 of the Regional Trial Court of _______________, in Criminal Case No. _____, is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that [XXX] is ORDERED to PAY the [AAA] the following amounts: [P]75,000.00 as civil indemnity [P]75,000.00 as moral damages; and [P]75,000.00 as exemplary damages all with interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from this date until fully paid.

SO ORDERED. 22

The CA held that the prosecution was able to establish beyond reasonable doubt, all the elements of statutory rape, to wit: (1) AAA was less than 12 years old when she was raped by XXX in August 2011, thru AAA's testimony, and the presentation of her Certificate of Live Birth; (2) XXX's identity as AAA's rapist, thru AAA's testimony; and (3) XXX's sexual intercourse with AAA, thru her testimony. 23

AAA's testimony that she was raped was corroborated by the medico-legal report presented before the RTC. 24 The medico-legal report found that AAA had a "laceration, labia minora right and annular hymen." 25 The CA, affirming the RTC, gave weight and credence to the medico-legal report. 26 Even assuming that the medico-legal report has no evidentiary value, the prosecution has established XXX's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. by proving all the elements of statutory rape.

While XXX pointed out inconsistencies on the testimony of AAA, the CA found that these were trivial matters that did not affect AAA's credibility as a witness. 27

Lastly, the CA ruled that the penalty to be imposed against XXX is reclusion perpetua for the crime of statutory rape, and awarded damages with interest to AAA. 28

On February 26, 2019, XXX filed his Notice of Appeal, 29 on the ground that the CA Decision dated January 31, 2019 is contrary to fact, law and applicable jurisprudence.

When this appeal was instituted before this Court, the parties made their Manifestations 30 that they will adopt their Appellant's and Appellee's Briefs, respectively, in lieu of their Supplemental Briefs.

Issue

Whether the CA erred in convicting accused-appellant of statutory rape despite the failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt

Our Ruling

The appeal is unmeritorious.

AAA's testimony shall be

This Court is guided by these settled principles in determining the guilt, or innocence of the accused in rape cases:

(a) An accusation for rape is easy to make, difficult to prove and even more difficult to disprove;

(b) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with utmost caution; and

(c) The evidence of the prosecution must stand on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. 31

The most important issue in rape cases is the victim's credibility because the crime of rape may be proven by his/her sole and uncorroborated testimony if his/her testimony is clear, positive and probable. 32

Jurisprudence has provided guidelines in addressing credibility of witnesses, thus:

First, the Court gives the highest respect to the RTC's evaluation of the testimony of the witnesses, considering its unique position in directly observing the demeanor of a witness on the stand. From its vantage point, the trial court is in the best position to determine the truthfulness of witnesses.

Second, absent any substantial reason which would justify the reversal of the RTC's assessments and conclusions, the reviewing court is generally bound by the lower court's findings, particularly when no significant facts and circumstances, affecting the outcome of the case, are shown to have been overlooked or disregarded.

And third, the rule is even more stringently applied of the CA concurred with the RTC. 33

In this case, accused-appellant faults the CA for affirming his conviction on the basis of AAA's inconsistent and incredible testimony.

First, accused-appellant points out that AAA pressed charges of rape against him because she wanted him imprisoned, and that she and her siblings do not approve of him as their mother's live-in partner. 34

Second, during the alleged rape incident, AAA neither showed resistance nor shouted for help. 35 As for the threats he hurled against her, these were merely words, and he was never armed with a deadly weapon. 36

This Court finds that these inconsistencies are not material to the instant case. The allegation of ill motive such as those arising from resentment or revenge, has not prevented the Court from giving, if proper, full credence to a minor complainant's testimony who remained steadfast throughout her direct and cross examination. 37 This is because ill motive is never an essential element of a crime. 38

This Court also finds AAA's testimony credible despite accused-appellant's insistence that the former did not behave normally when she was raped. Similar arguments of failure to resist and to shout for help during the rape incident were raised in People v. Lolos, 39 to wit:

The fact that the accused never threatened or forced AAA on that particular night and that she was still able to go out of the house and buy something from a store cannot exculpate him. Even if she did not resist him or even gave her consent, his having carnal knowledge of her is still considered rape considering that she was only eight (8) years old at that time. It must be remembered that the accused is an uncle of the victim and has moral ascendancy over her. Her behavior can be explained by the fear she had of the accused, who had repeatedly beaten her for various reasons. His moral ascendancy over her, combined with memories of previous beatings, was more than enough to intimidate her and render her helpless and submissive while she was being brutalized.

x x x. The behavior and reaction of every person cannot be predicted with accuracy. It is an accepted maxim that different people react differently to a given situation or type of situation, and there is no standard form of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange or startling experience. Not every rape victim can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone. Some may shout; some may faint; and some be shocked into insensibility, while others may openly welcome the intrusion. Behavioral psychology teaches us that people react to similar situations dissimilarly. There is no standard form of behavior when one is confronted by a shocking incident. The workings of the human mind when placed under emotional stress are unpredictable. This is true specially in this case where the victim is a child of tender age under the moral ascendancy of the perpetrator of the crime. 40 (Emphasis supplied.)

This Court stresses that there is no standard form of behavior for a rape victim, more so for a minor such as AAA who was only 11 years old when she was raped by her mother's live-in partner.

XXX's guilt of committing

Under Article 266-A 1 (d) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), rape may be committed as follows:

Article 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. — Rape is Committed. —

1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

xxx xxx xxx

d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

Statutory rape is committed by sexual intercourse with a woman who is less than 12 years old, regardless of whether she consented to the sexual act. 41 Consent to sexual intercourse of children less than 12 years old is immaterial because they are presumed to be incapable of giving consent, on account of his/her tender years. 42

In the prosecution of statutory rape, the following must be established: (1) the victim is a female who is less than 12 years old or is demented; (2) the identity of the accused; and (3) the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim. 43

As regards qualified rape, Article 266-B 44 of the RPC provides that the penalty of death shall be imposed against the offender if the complainant is less than 18 years old and the accused-appellant is a step-parent, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. The relationship of the victim and the offender must be sufficiently alleged in the information. In People v. Arcillas, 45 where the information averred that the offender is "then the stepfather" of then 13-year-old victim, but was in fact only the common-law husband of the victim's mother, this Court ruled that the offender can only be punished for the crime of simple rape, and not qualified rape. 46

In this case, this Court stresses that accused-appellant cannot be convicted of qualified rape where the penalty prescribed by law is death, because the qualifying circumstance of being a common-law spouse of accused-appellant to the mother of AAA, was not properly alleged in the Information, to wit:

That on or about the month of August 2011 in the _______________, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the said accused who is the stepfather of the victim, by force, threat, intimidation and taking advantage of the tender age of 11 year old "AAA" did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge to said "AAA" and made her his sexual toy without the latter's consent and against her will, which sexual abuses are condition prejudicial to the latter's development and best interest. 47

The Information alleged "the stepfather of the victim." However, it turned out that accused-appellant is not AAA's stepfather, but only the common-law husband of AAA's mother. In addition, AAA's birth certificate disclosed that her father was EEE, who had been married to AAA's mother, 48 who later became a widow upon the death of EEE. No evidence was adduced to establish that accused-appellant and AAA's mother were legally married.

While accused-appellant may not be convicted with the crime of qualified rape, the prosecution was able to establish the elements of statutory rape.

First, the prosecution was able to prove that AAA was only 11 years old when accused-appellant raped her in August 2011. In 2012, she was only 12 years old when she testified before the RTC. AAA's Birth Certificate 49 also shows that she was born on September 26, 2000 in _______________.

Second, accused-appellant's identity was established thru AAA's categorical and positive testimony that accused-appellant was her rapist.

Third, carnal knowledge was primarily established by AAA's testimony, to wit:

Q: Now, on that August 11, you said that you were living under the custody of your mother in the same house together with [XXX]. While living in the same house, can you tell us if there was an untoward incident that occurred between you and [XXX]?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: What is that incident you are referring to?

A: He inserted his penis into my vagina.

Q: Can you still recall on what time of the day that incident occur[r]ed?

A: 12:00 o'clock midnight.

xxx xxx xxx

Q: You said that [XXX] inserted his penis inside your vagina in the evening of August 11. How did [XXX] able to do if you still can recall?

A: He lowered his shortpants.

Q: How about his brief? What did he do to his brief?

A: He lowered also his brief.

Q: How about you, can you still recall what were you wearing that evening when [XXX] inserted his penis [in] your vagina?

A: I was wearing shortpants and pant[y].

Q: What did [XXX] do with your shortpants and pant[y]?

A: He also remove[d] my shortpants and pant[y].

Q: You said that it was 12:00 o'clock midnight. You are supposed to be asleep at that time. How come that you were able to know that [XXX] remove[d] his shortpants and brief and also removed your shorts and pant[y]?

A: Because I was surprised (Kinalasan ako.).

Q: Since you were surprised with what [XXX] did to you, did you not shout only to get attention of the other persons including your mother?

A: I did not.

Q: Why did you not shout?

A: Because I was threatened.

Q: He threatened you with what?

A: He said: "Do not tell anybody because I will kill all your siblings."

Q: [Was] [XXX] holding any weapon [at] that time when he threatened you?

A: None.

Q: When [XXX] threatened you, how did you feel? Were you afraid?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: By the way, you said that [XXX] inserted his penis inside your vagina. Why did you know that?

A: Because there was something hot.

Q: And that something hot, was it hard or soft?

A: Hard.

Q: And that hard and hot object when you feel that inside your vagina, what did you feel? Did you feel any pain or you enjoyed it?

A: I felt pain.

Q: While the penis of [XXX] was inside your vagina, did he make any push and pull movement?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: For how long did [XXX] ma[k]e those push and pull movement?

A: Three hours.

xxx xxx xxx

Q: That three (3) hours you are referring to is the time that you sleep?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Let us go back to the push and pull movement made by [XXX]. [Did] it [occur for a] very long or a short span of time?

A: Long time.

Q: Were you able to know if [XXX] [was] able to reach orgasm?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: How were you able to know it?

A: There was something in his penis that goes (sic) out which is (sic) hot.

Q: After that something that [came] out from the penis of [XXX], when that something you said was very hot c[a]me out from the penis of [XXX], is that the time where he stopped [m]aking [the] push and pull movement?

A: No, sir.

Q: You mean he continued doing the push and pull movement?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: And you were able to know the reason when he stop[ped] the push and pull movement?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: When [XXX] stop[ped] the push and pull movement, was his penis still hard or soft?

A: Still hard.50 (Emphasis supplied)

It is a settled rule that rape may be proven by the sole and uncorroborated testimony of the offended party, provided that her testimony is clear, positive and probable. 51 In this case, AAA's sole testimony is sufficient to prove the crime of statutory rape. AAA's positive, categorical and spontaneous testimony shows that accused-appellant had inserted his penis into her vagina, which consummates the crime of statutory rape.

Furthermore, when the victim's testimony is corroborated by the physician's finding of penetration, there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisites of carnal knowledge. 52 Here, AAA's claim of rape was also corroborated by the medical findings of Dr. Arlene R. Tabada, 53 who conducted the physical examination on AAA. Based on the Medico-Legal Report she prepared on February 27, 2012, she found that AAA had a "laceration, labia minora right and annular hymen." 54

Penalty to be imposed and

Where statutory rape under paragraph 1 (d) of Article 266-A was committed without any of the qualifying or aggravating circumstances enumerated under Article 266-B, the penalty to be imposed for the crime of rape shall be reclusion perpetua.

With respect to the award of damages, in rape cases, the award of civil indemnity is mandatory upon proof of the commission of rape, while moral damages are automatically awarded without the need to prove mental and physical suffering. 55 Exemplary damages are also imposed, to set an example for the public good and to protect minors from all forms of sexual abuse. 56 In accordance with People v. Jugueta, 57 and People v. Tulagan58 for the crime of statutory rape under Article 266-A 1 (d), accused-appellant is civilly liable for the following: civil indemnity of P75,000.00, moral damages of P75,000.00, and exemplary damages of P75,000.00.

In consonance with prevailing jurisprudence, the amount of damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this judgment until said amounts are fully paid. 59

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DENIED. The Court of Appeals' Decision dated January 31, 2019 in CA-G.R. CEB CR-HC No. 02226 is AFFIRMEDin toto. Accused-appellant XXX is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Statutory Rape under Article 266-A 1 (d) of the Revised Penal Code, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He is ORDERED to PAY AAA the amounts of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, with interest of 6% per annum imposed on all the amounts awarded from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.

SO ORDERED."

By authority of the Court:

(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court

By:

MARIA TERESA B. SIBULODeputy Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1. At the victim's instance or, if the victim is a minor, that of his or her guardian, the complete name of the accused may be replaced by fictitious initials and his or her personal circumstances blotted out from the decision, resolution, or order if the name and personal circumstances of the accused may tend to establish or compromise the victim's identities, in accordance with Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 (III [1] [c]) dated September 5, 2017.

2. Penned by Associate Justice Louis P. Acosta, with Associate Justices Pamela Ann Abella Maxino and Dorothy P. Montejo-Gonzaga concurring; rollo pp. 5-21.

3. Rendered by Acting Presiding Judge Carlos O. Arguelles; CA rollo, pp. 47-55.

4.Id. at 47-48.

5.Rollo, p. 6.

6.Id. at 6-7.

7.Id. at 8.

8.Id.

9.Id.

10.Id.

11.Id.

12.Id.

13.Id.

14. CA rollo, p. 55.

15.Id.

16.Id.

17.Id. at 52.

18.Id.

19.Id.

20.Id. at 53.

21.Id. at 54.

22.Rollo, p. 20.

23.Id. at 11.

24.Id. at 15.

25.Id.

26.Id.

27.Id. at 16.

28.Id.

29.Id. at 22-23.

30.Id. at 40-42; 30-32.

31.People of the Philippines v. Renante Seguisabal y Trasona, G.R. No. 250330, March 18, 2021.

32.Id.

33.People v. Reyes, 818 Phil. 950, 960 (2017), citing People v. Pareja, 724 Phil. 759, 773 (2014).

34. CA rollo, p. 41.

35.Id. at 42.

36.Id.

37.People of the Philippines v. AAA, G.R. No. 247007, March 18, 2021.

38.Id.

39.People v. Lolos, 641 Phil. 624 (2010).

40.Id. at 633-634.

41.People v. AAA, G.R. No. 247007, March 18, 2021.

42.People of the Philippines v. Salvador Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, March 12, 2019.

43.People of the Philippines v. XXXXX, G.R. No. 229836, July 17, 2019.

44.Article 266-B. Penalty. —

xxx xxx xxx

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

I) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim[.]

45. 692 Phil. 40 (2012).

46.Id. at 48.

47. Records, p. 1.

48.Id. at 8.

49.Id.

50. TSN, November 8, 2012, pp. 11-18.

51.People of the Philippines v. Eugene Seguisabal, G.R. No. 240424, March 18, 2021.

52.People of the Philippines v. Larry Mar Elle y Sumile, G.R. No. 235792, September 5, 2018.

53. Records, p. 9.

54.Id.

55.People v. Bolo, 792 Phil. 905, 925-926 (2016).

56.Id. at 926.

57.People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 849 (2016).

58.Supra note 42.

59.CICL XXX, Child in Conflict with the Law v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 246146, March 18, 2021.