THIRD DIVISION
G.R. No. 249260, May 05, 2021
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BBB,* Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
INTING, J.:
This is an appeal1 assailing the Decision2 dated May 24, 2019 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09770 which affirmed with modification as to the penalties and award of damages the Joint Decision3 dated June 29, 2017 of Branch 18, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Malolos City, Bulacan finding BBB (accused-appellant) guilty beyond reasonable doubt Qualified Rape in Criminal Case Nos. 806-M-2010, 807-M-2010, 808-M-2010, and 809-M-2010.
Upon arraignment on September 1, 2010, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges.5Criminal Case No. 806-M-2010
x x x
That on or about the 5th day of November 2008, in the xxxxxxxxxxx, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the uncle of [AAA], with lewd designs and with force, violence and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, have carnal knowledge with his niece, [AAA] a 7 year old minor, against her will and without her consent, which debased, degraded and demeaned the intrinsic worth and dignity of the said child as a human being.
Contrary to law.x x x Criminal Case No. 807-M-2010
x x x
That [on] or about and during the year 2007, in the xxxxxxxxxxx, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the uncle of [AAA] with lewd designs[,] violence and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commit sexual assault by inserting his finger to the vagina of [AAA], a 5 year old minor, against her will and without her consent, which debased, degraded and demeaned the intrinsic worth and dignity of said child as a human being.
Contrary to law.x x x Criminal Case No. 808-M-2010
x x x
That [on] or about and during the year 2008, in the xxxxxxxxxxx, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the uncle of [AAA] with lewd designs[,] violence and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously commit sexual assault by inserting his finger to the vagina of [AAA], a 6 year old minor, against her will and without her consent, which debased, degraded and demeaned the intrinsic worth and dignity of said child as a human being.
Contrary to law.
x x xCriminal Case No. 809-M-2010
x x x
That [on] or about and during the year 2007, in the xxxxxxxxxxx, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being the uncle of [AAA] with lewd design[,] violence and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously commit sexual assault by inserting his finger to the vagina of [AAA], a 6 year old minor, against her will and without her consent, which debased, degraded and demeaned the intrinsic worth and dignity, of said child as a human being.
Contrary to law.4chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
WHEREFORE, finding accused [BBB] guilty beyond reasonable doubt in all the charges against him, this Court hereby sentences him as follows:Aggrieved, accused-appellant appealed before the CA.12
1) In Crim. Case No. 806-M-2010 for qualified rape - The penalty of Reclusion Perpetua without eligibility for parole; and to pay [AAA] the amount of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 for moral damages and P50,000.00 for exemplary damages. 2) In Crim. Case No. 807-M-2010 for qualified rape (of the second kind) - the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and ten (10) months of reclusion temporal as maximum; and to pay [AAA] the amount P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 for moral damages and P50,000.00 for exemplary damages. 3) In Criminal Case No. 808-M-2010, for qualified rape (of the second kind), the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and ten (10) months of reclusion temporal as maximum, and to pay [AAA] the amount P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 for moral damages and P50,000.00 for exemplary damages; and 4) In Criminal No. 809-M-2010 for qualified rape (of the second kind) the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years and ten (10) months of reclusion temporal as maximum; and to pay [AAA] the amount P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 for moral damages, and P50,000.00 for exemplary damages.
Accused [BBB] is also ordered to pay interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the time of the finality of this decision until fully paid to be imposed on the civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages.
SO ORDERED.11chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DENIED. The Joint Decision dated 29 June 2017 rendered by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 18, Malolos, Bulacan, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION and should be read as follows:Hence, the instant appeal before the Court.
(1) In Criminal Case No. 806-M-2010, this Court finds appellant BBB GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility of parole. He is further ordered to pay private complainant P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages, and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; (2) In Criminal Case No. 807-M-2010, this Court finds BBB GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of rape by sexual assault in relation to R.A. No. 7610. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 15 years, 6 months and 20 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. He is further ordered to pay private complainant P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages; (3) Criminal Case No. 808-M-2010, this Court finds BBB GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of rape by sexual assault in relation to R.A. No. 7610. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 15 years, 6 months and 20 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. He is further ordered to pay private complainant P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages; (4) In Criminal Case No. 809-M-2010, this Court finds BBB GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of rape by sexual assault in relation to R.A. No. 7610. He is sentenced to suffer penalty of imprisonment for 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 15 years, 6 months and 20 days of reclusion temporal, as maximum. He is further ordered to pay private complainant P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages; and
Accused BBB is also ordered to pay interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the time of finality of this decision until fully paid to be unposed on the civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages.
SO ORDERED.15chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
In Criminal Case No. 806-M-2010, the crime committed is Qualified Statutory Rape. |
Sexual assault under paragraph Article 266-A of the RPC in relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610. |
Considering the development of the crime of sexual assault from a mere "crime against chastity" in the form of acts of lasciviousness to a "crime against persons" akin to rape, as well as the rulings in Dimakuta and Caoili, We hold that if the acts constituting sexual assault arc committed against a victim under 12 years of age or is demented, the nomenclature of the offense should now be "Sexual Assault under paragraph 2, Article 266-A of the RPC in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610" and no longer "Acts of Lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC in relation to Section 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610," because sexual assault as a form of acts of lasciviousness is no longer covered by Article 336 but by Article 266-A (2) of the RPC, as amended by R.A. No. 8353. Nevertheless, the imposable penalty is still reclusion temporal in its medium period, and not prision mayor.24chanRoblesvirtualLawlibraryIn here, AAA testified that accused-appellant inserted his finger into her vagina on three different occasions since she was five years old. Her testimony established in a clear and straightforward manner her age at the time of the incidents, the identity of accused-appellant, and the details of the crimes committed against her. Under the circumstances, it is unfathomable that a 6-year-old child would be able to describe in such detail how she was molested by her own uncle unless her statements were true. Her candid, straightforward, and consistent testimony prevails over the self-serving allegations of the defense.25]
In the present case, the first incident of sexual abuse was committed when private complainant was merely five years old. It should be noted that there were several incidents of sexual abuse, thus, private complainant cannot be expected to have a flawless recollection of her harrowing experience in the hands of appellant. Furthermore, the inconsistencies in the private complainant's testimony regarding the place and time of the incidents are immaterial to prove the elements of the crimes charged. Moreover, the findings laid down in the Initial Medico-Legal Report issued by PCI Marianne S. Ebdane bolstered private complainant's testimony in this manner:chanroblesvirtualawlibraryFINDINGS:
Hymen: Congested, no laceration noted.
Perihymenal region: presence of abrasion.
Periurethral region: congested, abrasion. Urethral
opening: congested, laceration at 11 o'clock position.
Anus: unremarkable.
CONCLUSION:
Findings show clear evidence of recent blunt force or penetrating trauma.26
Accused-appellant's defenses of denial and alibi. |
Endnotes:
* 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. (RA) 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes"; RA 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.
1 See Notice of Appeal dated June 17, 2019, rollo, pp. 14-16.
2Id. at 3-13; penned by Associate Justice Ruben Reynaldo G. Roxas with Associate Justices Marlene Gonzales-Sison and Victoria Isabel A. Paredes, concurring.
3 CA rollo, pp. 45-58; penned by Presiding Judge Victoria C. Fernandez-Bernardo.
4 As culled from the joint Decision dated June 29, 2017 of the Regional Trial Court, id. at 46-48.
5Id. at 48.
6Id. at49.
7Id.; rollo, pp. 5-6.
8Id. at 49-50; id. at 6.
9Id. at 50; id.
10Id. at 52-53.
11Id. at 57-58.
12 See Notice of Appeal dated August 17, 2017, id. at 10.
13Rollo, p. 9.
14Id. at 10.
15Id. at 12-13.
16Id. at 21.
17Id. at 22-24.
18Id. at 27-29.
19 Paragraph 1, Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, provides:
ART. 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:
a. Through force, threat or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority;
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age is demented, even though none circumstances mentioned above be present.
20People v. Ibañez, G.R. No. 231984, July 6, 2020, citing People v. Armodia, 810 Phil. 822, 833 (2017), further citing People v. Malana, 646 Phil. 290, 310 (2010).
21 See People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 234190, October 1, 2018; People v. XXX, G.R. No. 244047, December 10, 2019.
22People v. Manaligod, 831 Phil. 204, 213 (2018), citing People v. Clores, Jr., 475 Phil. 99, 107 (2004).
23 G.R. No. 227363, March 12, 2019.
24People v. HHH, G.R. No. 248245, August 26, 2020, citing People v. Tulagan, id.
25People v. Sumayod, G.R. No. 230626, March 9, 2020.
26Rollo, pp. 9-10.
27People v. Tulagan, supra note 23.
28 661 Phil. 208 (2011).
29People v. HHH, supra note 24.
30Id.cralawredlibrary