EN BANC
[G.R. Nos. 142901-02. July 23, 2002]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs. JIMMY MANLOD, accused-appellant.
D E C I S I O N
PER CURIAM:
Before the Court
on automatic review is the Decision dated March 16, 2000 of the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) of Oroquieta City, Branch 12, in Criminal Cases Nos. 1386 and 1387
finding accused-appellant Jimmy Manlod guilty of two counts of qualified rape.
On May 29, 1999,
two informations were filed against accused-appellant in the RTC of Oroquieta
City. The informations alleged:
Criminal
Case No. 1386 –
That sometime in the month of June
1998, in Taboc Sur, Oroquieta City and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused who is the natural father of Jimmalou Manlod,
a minor of 14 years having been born on January 13, 1984, with force and
intimidation and with the use of a bladed weapon, did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of his said daughter Jimmalou
Manlod against the latter’s will and consent.
CONTRARY to law with the commission
of the offense attended by the aggravating circumstances of age and
relationship, the private offended party being under 18 years of age and the
offender being her natural father.[1]
Criminal
Case No. 1387 –
That sometime in the month of June
1998, in Taboc Sur, Oroquieta City and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused who is the natural father of Jimmalou Manlod,
a minor of 14 years having been born on January 13, 1984, with force and
intimidation and with the use of a bladed weapon, did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of his said daughter Jimmalou
Manlod against the latter’s will and consent.
CONTRARY to law with the commission
of the offense attended by the aggravating circumstances of age and
relationship, the private offended party being under 18 years of age and the
offender being her natural father.[2]
When arraigned,
accused-appellant entered a plea of not guilty to both charges. Thereafter, a
joint trial of the cases ensued.
The prosecution
presented as it witnesses the victim Jimmalou Manlod, and Mrs. Lucita
Chavez-Manlod, the victim’s mother and spouse of accused-appellant.
The prosecution
established that accused-appellant and his wife Lucita have seven children, the
youngest being complainant Jimmalou, who was born on January 13, 1984.[3] The
Manlod spouses lived together with their children Junior and Jimmalou, and
their daughter-in-law Melissa, who is married to Junior[4].
Jimmalou
testified that accused-appellant raped her one evening in June, 1998, while she
was left at home with him. Jimmalou’s mother had earlier left their house to
visit her daughter Marivic in Taboc Sur. Junior was out fishing and brought his
wife Melissa with him. While accused-appellant was outside their house,
Jimmalou went to the house of their neighbor Boy Masayon to watch television.
Masayon’s house was about 15 meters from the house of the Manlods. Not long
thereafter, accused-appellant went to Masayon’s house, whipped Jimmalou’s back
with a belt and commanded her to go home. At around 6:00 p.m., Jimmalou went
home and laid out a mat in their living room where she, her mother and
sister-in-law slept every night. While the rest of her family was still out,
she went to sleep.[5]
Later that
evening, she woke up because she felt someone kicking her. She saw that it was
accused-appellant who kicked her and then commanded her to look for his short
pants. Jimmalou said that accused-appellant looked drunk and smelled of liquor.
She went inside accused-appellant’s room to look for the latter’s short pants
when she noticed that accused-appellant had followed her and was closing the
door of the room. Accused-appellant poked a double-bladed knife in Jimmalou’s
neck with his right hand and warned not to make any noise. He then pushed her
towards the bed and made her lie down. Still poking the knife in Jimmalou’s neck
with his right hand, accused-appellant ordered her to remove her short pants.
Thereafter, he ripped off her panty with his left hand. Accused-appellant knelt
down, placed his knees beside her thighs, ripped off her panty and inserted his
penis into Jimmalou’s vagina by doing push and pull movements. Jimmalou said
that she felt pain in her private part and in her abdomen. She added that she
could not shout for help because each time she tried to do so,
accused-appellant would press the pointed end of the knife to her neck and
threaten her that he would kill her and her mother if she resisted.[6]
While
accused-appellant was sexually abusing her, they heard someone walking outside
the house. Accused-appellant released Jimmalou and instructed her to put on her
short pants. After she left the room, Jimmalou placed her torn panty in the
trash can then lay down on the mat in their living room and cried herself to
sleep. Jimmalou was awakened later that night by the arrival of her mother and
sister-in-law, but for fear of accused-appellant, she did not tell them what
had happened earlier that evening.[7]
A week after the
aforementioned incident, also in June 1998, Jimmalou was again sexually abused
by accused-appellant. She recalled that this took place one morning at about
11:00 a.m. Jimmalou narrated that this occurred when she was alone with
accused-appellant in their house. She had just arrived from her classes at the
Misamis Occidental National High School. Her mother was attending a party at
Barangay Pines, where she was employed as a health worker. Junior was fishing
at sea while Melissa went to her parents’ home in Plaridel, Bulacan. Because
she was feverish and felt pain on her abdomen, Jimmalou lay down on the bench
in their living room and fell asleep. Subsequently, she noticed that somebody
was opening the door. When she saw that it was accused-appellant, Jimmalou
tried to go back to sleep but was kicked by accused-appellant and ordered to
look for the receipt of the karaoke which was allegedly kept by her mother
inside their bedroom.[8]
Jimmalou obeyed
accused-appellant and proceeded to look for the receipt inside her parents’
bedroom but could not find the same. She was about to tell accused-appellant
that she could not locate the receipt when accused-appellant entered the room
and closed the door behind him. He poked a double-bladed knife in Jimmalou’s
neck, pushed her toward the bed and warned her not to tell her mother of what
was going to happen. Jimmalou fell with her back on the bed. Accused-appellant
lifted her skirt, removed her panty, then mounted on top of her. Jimmalou tried
to free herself from her father’s clutches to avoid being raped again, but
could not do so because accused-appellant pressed the knife down her neck.
Accused-appellant made push and pull movements while inserting his penis into
Jimmalou’s vagina. Thereafter, she felt pain in her private part and abdomen.
Jimmalou cried and told accused-appellant, “you are a senseless father, you can
afford to do it only to your own daughter.”[9] Accused-appellant
warned Jimmalou not to tell her mother about what happened or else he would
kill them both, then he left the room and went to the kitchen. Jimmalou cried
as she returned to the bench in their living room. Later, she wrapped her panty
which was full of blood, in a cellophane bag and threw it away. She was unable
to go back to school in the afternoon because she felt like vomiting and felt
pain in her body. Her mother came home at about 5:00 p.m. that day but Jimmalou
was unable to tell her what accused-appellant did for fear that he would make
good his threats.[10]
Accused-appellant
left their home in August 1998 and lived with his son, Angging Manlod, whose
house was located at Taboc Norte.[11]
On February 1,
1999, about eight months after accused-appellant last sexually abused Jimmalou,
the latter noticed that her stomach had grown unusually large. She was
accompanied by her mother to an arbularyo (quack doctor) who advised
Jimmalou to have her stomach subjected to an x-ray examination because she had
a tumor therein. Jimmalou went to another arbularyo who confirmed the
findings of the first arbularyo.[12]
Heeding the
advice of the arbularyos, Jimmalou went to a hospital for an ultrasound
examination. The resident physician informed her that she did not have a tumor
in her stomach, but that she was pregnant. However, she did not divulge the
identity of her child’s father to anyone.[13]
On March 24,
1999, Jimmalou gave birth to a baby boy. Thereafter, on April 1, 1999, she met
her friend Ethel Molato at the house of her neighbor Boy Masayon and there
revealed to Ethel that the father of her child was her own father.[14]
Outraged, Ethel
told a certain Gina Albios what Jimmalou told her earlier. Albios in turn told Jimmalou’s
mother on April 2, 1999 that her husband was the father of their daughter’s
baby.[15]
Mrs. Lucita
Manlod (“Mrs. Manlod”) testified that she was angered by what she learned so she
accompanied Jimmalou to the police authorities on April 5, 2000 and filed two
criminal complaints charging accused-appellant of having raped Jimmalou.[16]
Mrs. Manlod
corroborated Jimmalou’s testimony and narrated that in the evening of April 2,
2000, while she was at the house of Gina Albios asking for leftover food to
feed their pigs, Gina told her to ask Jimmalou who the father of her child was,
because she was informed by Ethel Molato that it was accused-appellant who
sired Jimmalou’s child. Mrs. Manlod said that she could not immediately confirm
the information from Jimmalou because she was shocked, but she finally mustered
the courage to ask her daughter in the evening of April 2, 2000.[17]
She further
stated that Jimmalou then related to her the details of the first rape incident
where accused-appellant asked their daughter to look for his short pants, and
ravished her when he found her looking for the same inside his room. Mrs.
Manlod was told by Jimmalou that accused-appellant raped her (Jimmalou) twice
in June 1998.[18]
Accused-appellant,
the lone witness for the defense, denied the accusations against him. He said
that he was hardly at home during the month of June 1998, and thus, he could
not have sexually abused Jimmalou.
He testified
that on June 1 or 2, 1998, he went to Sinian, Baliangao, Misamis Occidental to
sell seven trunks of coconut trees. He returned to Taboc Sur on June 7, 1998 at
around noontime to fetch Jimmalou and buy her school uniform. However, he did
not go home with his daughter. Instead, he proceeded to his son Angging
Manlod’s house at Taboc Norte and spent the night there. The next day, he left
Oroquieta City and went to the house of a relative in Ozamiz City where he
stayed for three days. On June 12, 1998, accused-appellant and a nephew left
for Iligan City. Upon his arrival there, he worked in the house of a certain
Jose Batbatan for three days. Subsequently, he worked for three weeks as part
of a construction team headed by a certain Khadi for the building of a mosque.
On or about July 12, 1998, accused-appellant went to Oroquieta City to look for
additional laborers for the construction of the mosque, and remained in Angging
Manlod’s home for four days. He did not return to his family’s residence in
Taboc Sur, because he found out that his wife was angry at him for reasons he
did not know. On July 16, 1998, accused-appellant returned to Iligan City
together with two men whom he was able to recruit for the construction of the
mosque. He stayed in Iligan City until the end of July 1998. Accused-appellant
intended to go home to Taboc Sur, but he first engaged in a drinking spree with
a neighbor. When he arrived at his house to eat supper, he was met by his wife
who called him evil, satan and other similar names. Accused-appellant said that
he did not know that his daughter had filed complaints for rape against him. He
added that he learned of Jimmalou’s pregnancy from several persons in their
neighborhood.[19]
On March 16,
2000, the trial court promulgated its Decision in the two cases, the
dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, finding accused JIMMY
MANLOD guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape aggravated by
relationship in both cases, the Court sentences said accused to suffer the
penalty of DEATH in Criminal Case No. 1386 and another DEATH in Criminal Case
No. 1387, to be implemented in the manner provided by law. Accused is likewise
ordered to pay victim Jimmalou Manlod the amount of P75,000.00 moral damages
plus P20,000.00 as exemplary damages in each of the two cases.
Pursuant to Section 10 of Rule 122
of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, the records of the two (2) cases
including the transcript are hereby ordered forwarded to the Honorable Supreme
Court for automatic review and judgment within the reglementary period.
SO ORDERED.[20]
In his Appeal
Brief, accused-appellant asserts that the trial court erred in finding that his
guilt had been proven beyond reasonable doubt. He argues that there was a
significant delay between the time when the alleged rape incidents occurred and
the time when Jimmalou reported the matter to the police authorities diminishes
the credibility of private complainant’s testimony. Accused-appellant points
out that Jimmalou’s explanation for the delay, that she did not inform the
police authorities at once regarding her father’s sexual abuses because he had
threatened to kill her or her mother, was not satisfactory considering that
accused-appellant had left their home as early as August 1998. Jimmalou could
have reported the incidents to the police at that time. However, she kept
everything to herself even during her pregnancy and after she had given birth.
Worse, accused-appellant contends, Jimmalou chose to reveal her secret to her
friend Ethel, whom she had known for only two years and whose surname she could
not even remember. Accused-appellant claims that Jimmalou filed charges against
him to cover-up her relationship with a certain Carlito Lacia, which
relationship was disapproved by her parents.[21]
The Court finds
that the trial court did not err in finding accused-appellant guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of raping his daughter Jimmalou twice in June 1998.
In reviewing the
cases at bar, the Court observed the following guidelines it had previously
formulated for the review of rape cases: (1) an accusation of rape can be made
with facility, but it is difficult to prove, and even more difficult for the
accused to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape
where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant
must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the
prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw
strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense.[22]
In a prosecution
for rape, the complainant’s credibility is the single most important issue.[23] The trial
court’s evaluation of the credibility of the victim’s statements is accorded
great weight because it has the unique opportunity of hearing the witnesses
testify and observing their deportment and manner of testifying. The trial
court judge is indisputably in the best position to determine the truthfulness
of the complainant’s testimony. Thus, unless it is shown that the trial court
overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight
or substance that would otherwise affect the result of the case, its findings
will not be disturbed on appeal.[24]
The Court has
adhered to the rule that when the testimony of a woman who states under oath
that she had been raped meets the test of credibility, the accused may be
convicted on the basis of such testimony. This is so because by its very
nature, rape is committed with the least possibility of being seen by the
public.[25] A rape
victim who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank
manner, and who remains consistent, is regarded as a credible witness.[26]
In the cases at
bar, the trial court found Jimmalou’s testimony to be “firm, categorical and
straightforward.”[27] The trial
court noted that while she was narrating the bestial acts committed by her
father upon her, she cried unashamedly several times.[28] It has been held in several cases that
the crying of a victim during her testimony is evidence of the truth of the
rape charges,[29] for the
display of such emotion indicates the pain that the victim feels when she
recounts the details of her traumatic experience:
xxx
Q What
happened after you fell asleep?
A Someone
kicked me and when I open my eyes I saw my father and he told me to look for
his short pants.
Q What
if any did you notice of your father?
A As
if he was drank.
Q Why
did you say that he was drunk?
A Because
he smell Tanduay.
Q After
your father told you to look for his short pants, did he tell you where to look
for his short pants?
A No.
Q What
did you do after your father told you to look for his short pants?
A I
look for his short pants in the room of father because that was the place where
his clothings were placed.
Q What
happen while you were trying to locate the short pants inside the room of your
father?
A He
entered the room and closed the door.
Q Did
you ask him why he closed the door?
A Yes.
Q What
was his answer?
A He
told me: “Don’t make any noise” at the same time pointed to me a double bladed
knife.
Q Why
do you know that that was a double bladed knife?
A That
was what he told me.
Q When
did he tell you that?
A In
the house when he send me on an errand.
Q Are
you referring to that particular evening when he ask you to look for his short
pants?
A No.
Q So,
that was previous to the incident in question when you came to know that that
was a double bladed knife?
A Yes.
Q And
what happened after he closed the door pointing a double bladed knife? By the
way, where did he point that double bladed knife, what part of your body?
A On
my neck.
Q What
happened after he closed the door pointing a double bladed knife against your
neck and told you to keep quiet?
A He
pushed me towards the bed.
Q What
happened after that?
A He
pushed me towards the bed and mounted on top of me and at the same time the
double bladed knife was still aim on my neck and rip off my panty.
Q What
were you wearing at that time?
A T-shirt
with short pants.
Q How
about your short pants?
A He
told me to remove my short pants before he rip my panty.
Q Why
did you not fight back?
A Because
he threatened me that if ever I fight against him he will kill my mother and
me.
Q Why
did you not shout considering that there are houses of your neighbors located
very near your house?
A If
I will shout he will pushed and pressed the double bladed knife to my neck.
Q After
your father was able to tear your panty from your body, what did he do next?
A His
organ was inserted to mine and made a push and pull movement.
Q By
the way, what hand did he use in holding the knife when that knife was being
pointed against your neck?
A The
right hand.
Q What
hand did he use to tear or rip your panty from your body?
A The
left hand.
Q When
he tried to insert his organ into your organ why did you not attempt to push him
away from you?
A If
ever I move he will also pressed the double bladed knife on my neck.
Q When
he tried to tear or rip your panty from your body, what was his position at
that time?
A He
was in that position of kneeling in between my two thighs.
Q What
did you feel when your father succeeded in inserting his organ into your organ?
A I
felt pain on my abdomen and pain on my private part.
Q While
your father was making this push and pull movement, what were you doing?
A I
was crying.
Q Then,
after making those push and pull movement, what happened next?
A Then
we heard some noise that someone was walking at our side so he immediately
stood up.
xxx
Q Was
that the only time that your father abused you sexually?
A Two
times I was abused by him.
Q Can
you still remember when you were abused for the second time?
A June,
1998.
Q Considering
that it was still in the same month of June, 1998 when you were rape for the
second time, could you at least approximate how long after he committed that
first rape against you in the same month of June when he committed the second
rape?
A One
week after.
xxx
Q Will
you please tell us if you went to school in the morning of that day when you
were rape for the second time?
A Yes.
Q What
time did you arrive home from school at noon?
A Past
eleven o’clock already.
Q When
you arrived home was there anybody there?
A None
Q What
did you do after arriving home?
A I
lied down on a bench and fell asleep.
Q Were
you feeling okay at that time?
A No.
Q Why?
What were your feelings then?
A As
if I was feverish and I felt pain on my abdomen.
Q What
happened while you were lying on a bench inside your house?
A Somebody
suddenly open the door and I happened to be awaken and saw my father and I
return to my sleep.
Q You
just open your eyes, you did not rise or stand up?
A No.
Q Now,
this bench where you were lying where was this located inside your house?
A In
the sala.
Q When
you went back to sleep, what happened next?
A Someone
kick me and I work up and open my eyes and saw it was my father.
Q What
was his purpose in kicking you?
A He
wanted me to find the receipt of the Astrone.
Q What
is this Astrone.
A Of
a karaoke appliance.
Q Did
he tell you why he wanted you to locate the receipt of the Astrone?
A Yes.
Q What
did you do?
A I
look for the said receipt in his room and told my father that the same is
nowhere in the room. I reminded him that he took it from where my mother keep
it.
Q Why
did you went inside the room of your father in order to look for that receipt?
A Because
it was in that room that my mother had keep the receipt.
Q After
telling your father that the receipt was not in the place where your mother
placed it, what happened next?
A Again
he closed the door of the room when I was inside and pointed to me the double
bladed knife.
COURT:
Q What
time was that?
A About
twelve noon.
PROS. RAMOS:
Q What
were you wearing at that time?
A I
was in my school uniform.
Q To
what part of your body was the knife pointed?
A On
my neck.
Q While
pointing the knife against your neck, what else did he do?
A He
pushed me towards the bed and told me not to tell my mother and then he mounted
on top of me.
Q You
said you were wearing your school uniform, what did he do with that school
uniform you were wearing?
A He
open the skirt and remove my panty.
Q He
did not remove your skirt?
A No.
Q Did
he succeed in removing down your panty?
A Yes.
Q Why
did you not try to wiggle or move your body to prevent him in removing your
panty?
A Because
if ever I moved he will pressed hard against my neck the double bladed knife
and I cannot do anything.
Q After
he succeeded in removing your panty and mounted on top of you, what else did he
do?
A He
inserted his organ to my organ and made a push and pull movement.
Q Did
you feel when your father succeeded in penetrating you?
A Yes.
Q How
did you feel when he succeeded in penetrating you?
A I
felt pain on my private part as well as on my abdomen.
Q While
he was making this push and pull movement what did you do?
A I
just keep on crying and telling him that you are a senseless father, you can
afford to do it only to your own daughter.
COURT:
Q It
appears that you are now crying, why are you now crying?
A I
am afraid of him because as told by my brother that my father is going to kill
me so that he also own a pistol which is in the possession of my brother.
COURT:
Let it remain on record that the
witness is crying.
Proceed.
Q After
making those push and pull movement, what else happened?
A He
left and went towards the kitchen.
Q Did
he tell you anything before he went out of his room to go to the kitchen?
A Yes.
Q What
did he tell you?
A Again
he told me not to tell the incident to my mother because in case I will tell he
will kill me as well as my mother.
xxx
Q As
a result of the sexual assault committed against you by your father, will you
please tell us what happened to you?
A I
got pregnant.
Q When
for the first time that you come to know that you were pregnant?
A February
1, 1999.
Q What
was the reason why you came to discover that you were pregnant?
A Because
my stomach was bulging. We went to a quack doctor and I was told I have a tumor
and advise to have an X-Ray and we went to another quack doctor in Plaridel and
again I was told to have an X-Ray and then I went to the hospital and we were
advise (sic) to have an ultrasound in order to know what cause the bulging of
my stomach.
Q When
you were advise (sic) to submit to an Ultrasound examination, what did you do?
A Yes,
I submitted for an ultrasound examination to Doctor Conde.
Q That
was on February 1, 1999?
A Yes.
Q That
was the reason why you came to know that you were pregnant?
A Yes.
Q Did
your mother forced (sic) you to tell the truth who was the father of the baby
you were conceiving?
A Yes,
I was forced.
Q Did
you tell your mother?
A No.
Q Why?
A Because
I am afraid of my father.
xxx
Q When
did you deliver the child?
A March
24, 1999.
Q When
you already deliver the child, still you did not inform your mother and your
siblings who fathered your child?
A No.
xxx[30]
Moreover, the
trial court relied on Jimmalou’s testimony because it found no motive on her
part to fabricate such grave charges against her own father. The Court has held
in several cases that no daughter would go out in public and falsely accuse her
father of rape if it were not true. It is against human nature for a girl to
fabricate a story that would expose herself as well as her family to a lifetime
of dishonor,[31] especially
where her charges could mean the death of her own father.[32]
The Court agrees
with the trial court’s pronouncement that the lapse of ten months between the
time Jimmalou was last raped by accused-appellant and the time she reported the
matter to the authorities does not diminish the credibility of her story. There
is no standard human reaction when one suffers such a harrowing experience as
rape. It is therefore not unusual for a rape victim to suffer in silence the
onslaught on her honor rather than reveal her story.[33] The Court
has acknowledged in several cases that the hesitance of the victim in reporting
the crime to the authorities is not necessarily an indication of a fabricated
charge for the initial reluctance of a young, inexperienced lass to admit
having been ravished is normal and natural.[34] This is
especially true where the delay can be attributed to the pattern of fear
instilled by the threats of bodily harm made by a person who exercises moral
ascendancy over the victim.[35] In People vs. Santos,[36] the Court
explained:
A rape victim’s actions are
oftentimes overwhelmed by fear rather than by reason. It is this fear,
springing from the initial rape, that the perpetrator hopes to build a climate
of extreme psychological terror which would, he hopes, numb his victim into
silence and submissiveness. Incestuous rape magnifies this terror, because the
perpetrator is a person normally expected to give solace and protection to the
victim. Furthermore, in incest, access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood
relationship, proximity magnifying the sense of helplessness and the degree of
fear.
...The rapist perverts whatever
moral ascendancy and influence he has over his victim in order to intimidate
and force the latter to submit to repeated acts of rape over a period of time.
In many instances, he succeeds and the crime is forever kept on a lid. In a few
cases, the victim suddenly finds the will to summon unknown sources of courage
to cry out for help and bring her depraved malefactor to justice.
Given this pattern, we have
repeatedly ruled that the failure of the victim to immediately report the rape
is not indicative of fabrication xxx[37]
In the cases at
bar, Jimmalou repeatedly explained that accused-appellant threatened to kill
her or her mother if she did not give in to his desires.[38] Her fear
of what accused-appellant would do to her or her mother if she revealed his
evil deeds was what compelled her to suffer in silence for a long time.
The lower court
was also correct in imposing the supreme penalty of death since R.A. No. 8353
(The Anti-Rape Law of 1997) was already in force in 1998 when the rapes were
committed. Said law requires that the circumstances of the minority of the
victim and her relationship with the offender must concur for the death penalty
to be imposable. Article 226-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A.
No. 8353 provides:
xxx
The death penalty shall also be
imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following
aggravating/qualifying circumstances.
1. 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 degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of
the victim;
xxx
The Court has
previously explained that the circumstances of minority and relationship are
considered as special qualifying circumstances because they alter the nature of
the crime of rape and thus warrant the imposition of the death penalty. These
circumstances must be alleged in the information and established during trial
for the court to be able to impose the death penalty.[39]
In the cases at
bar, the father-daughter relationship between accused-appellant and Jimmalou
was alleged in the information and proven in the course of the trial.[40]
Jimmalou’s minority at the time the crimes were committed was also sufficiently
established by the prosecution.[41]
The Court also
finds it necessary to increase the award of damages by the trial court. The
lower court in its decision held accused-appellant liable to pay moral damages
in the amount of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00) only in each of the cases,
in addition to the civil indemnity of P75,000.00 for each count of rape. In
addition to civil indemnity, moral damages are automatically granted to the
victim in rape cases without need of proof for it is assumed that the private
complainant has sustained mental, physical and psychological suffering.[42] Under current
rulings, the victim is entitled to the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos
(P50,000.00) as moral damages for each count of rape.[43]
Further, where
the existence of an aggravating circumstance is proven, as in the cases at bar
where the circumstances of minority and relationship were established,
exemplary damages may be awarded, in accordance with Article 2230 of the Civil
Code.[44] The
exemplary damages awarded by the lower court in the amount of Twenty Thousand
Pesos (P20,000.00) for each count of rape should be increased to Twenty Five
Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) in accorded with the latest rulings of the Court.
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Regional Trial
Court of Oroquieta City, Branch 12 in Criminal Cases Nos. 142901 and 142902 is
hereby MODIFIED, as follows:
1. In Criminal
Case No. 142901, the accused-appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of
death and ordered to pay the victim the amounts of Seventy Five Thousand Pesos
(P75,000.00) as civil indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as moral
damages, and Twenty Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) as exemplary damages; and
2. In Criminal
Case No. 142902, the accused-appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of
death and ordered to pay the victim the amounts of Seventy Five Thousand Pesos
(P75,000.00) as civil indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as moral
damages, and Twenty Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) as exemplary damages.
Three (3)
members of this Court maintain their position that R.A. No. 7659, insofar as it
prescribes the death penalty is unconstitutional. Nevertheless, they submit to
the ruling of the majority that the said law is not unconstitutional and that
the death penalty should be imposed in this case.
In accordance
with Article 83 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 25 of R.A.
7659, upon finality of this decision, let the record of this case be forwarded
to the Office of the President for possible exercise of clemency and pardoning
power.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, Vitug,
Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez,
Carpio, Austria-Martinez, and Corona, JJ., concur.
Davide, Jr.,
C.J., on
official leave.
Bellosillo,
J., no
part. Did not take part in
deliberations.
[1] Rollo, p.
12
[2] Id., at
14.
[3] Birth Certificate of Jimmalou Chavez Manlod, Records,
p. 6.
[4] TSN, February 11, 2000, p.5.
[5] Id., at
6-9.
[6] Id., at
9-12.
[7] Id., at
12-14.
[8] Id., at
14-17.
[9] Id., at
17-19.
[10] Id., at
19-20.
[11] Id., at
22.
[12] Id.
[13] Id., at
22-23.
[14] Id., at
23-24.
[15] Id. at
24-25.
[16] See Records, p. 5.
[17] TSN, February 22, 2000, pp. 4-6.
[18] Id., at
6-8.
[19] TSN, March 2, 2000, pp. 3-7.
[20] Rollo, p
25.
[21] Accused-Appellant’s Brief, Rollo, pp. 58-61.
[22] People
vs. De Guzman, G.R. Nos. 140333-34, December 11, 2001.
[23] People
vs. Tundag, 342 SCRA 704, 711 (2000).
[24] People
vs. Yaoto, G.R. Nos. 136317-18, November 22, 2001; People vs. Rebato,
G.R. No.139552, May 24, 2001; People
vs. Villadares, G.R. No. 137649, March 8, 2001, People vs. Saladino, G.R.
Nos. 137481-83 & 138455, March 7, 2001.
[25] People vs.
Barcelona, 325 SCRA 168, 178 (2000); People vs. Lerio, 324
SCRA 76, 82 (2000); People vs.
Sancha, 324 SCRA 646, 663 (2000); People
vs. Flores, 322 SCRA 779, 784 (2000).
[26] People vs.
Supnad, G.R. Nos. 133791-94, August 8, 2001.
[27] RTC Decision, p. 6, Rollo, p. 23.
[28] Id., p. 7,
Rollo, p. 24.
[29] People
vs. Quilatan, 341 SCRA 247, 253 (2000); People vs. Villanos, 337
SCRA 78, 87 (2000); People vs. Sancha,
324 SCRA 646, 663 (2000).
[30] TSN, February 11, 2000, pp. 9-23.
[31] People vs.
Traya, 332 SCRA 499, 505 (2000); People vs. Guiwan, 331
SCRA 70, 77 (2000); People vs.
Bernaldez, 322 SCRA 462, 471 (2000).
[32] People vs.
Tundag, 342 SCRA 704, 713 (2000).
[33] People vs.
Lucban, 322 SCRA 313, 320 (2000).
[34] People vs.
Taño, 331 SCRA 449, 461 (2000); etc.
[35] People vs.
Alpe, G.R. No. 132133, November 29, 2001.
[36] 334 SCRA 655, [666] (2000), citing People vs.
Melivo, 253 SCRA 347 (1996).
[37] Id., at
666.
[38] TSN, January 15, 1998, p.10; TSN, February 11, 1998,
pp. 12, 14.
[39] People vs.
Baniqued, G.R. Nos. 130653 and 139384, December 11, 2001; People vs.
Gabon, supra; People vs.
Ferolino, 329 SCRA 719 (2000).
[40] Birth Certificate of Jimmalou Chavez Manlod, Records,
p. 6; Testimony of Mrs. Lucita Chavez Manlod, TSN, February 22, 2000, p. 3;
Testimony of Accused-appellant Jimmy Manlod, TSN, March 2, 2000, p. 4.
[41] Id.
[42] People vs. De Guzman, supra.
[43] Id.; People vs. Balas, G.R. No.
138838, December 11, 2001; People vs. Dumlao, supra.
[44] Id.