EN
BANC
PEOPLE OF THE Appellee,
- versus - ROLANDO REYES y NACE, Appellant. |
G.R. No. 167180 Present: PUNO, C.J., QUISUMBING, SANTIAGO, SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, CARPIO, AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, CORONA, CARPIO MORALES, CALLEJO, SR., AZCUNA, TINGA, CHICO-NAZARIO, GARCIA, and VELASCO,
JR., JJ. Promulgated: January
25, 2007 |
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
D
E C I S I O N
CARPIO MORALES, J.:
Appellant
Rolando Reyes y Nace was charged on
Criminal Case No. 3346
That
on or about
Criminal Case No. 3347
That on or about 9:00 o’clock (sic) in the evening of September 10,
1997, in . . . Municipality of
Villaverde, Province of Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused who [is] the father of the
offended party [AAA], and by means of force and intimidation, willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously did lie, and succeed [in] having carnal knowledge of
his daughter [AAA], a minor who was then under eighteen years against
her will and to her damage and prejudice.[3] (Underscoring supplied)
Criminal Case No. 3348
That on or about 1:00 o’clock (sic) in the early dawn of November 30,
1997, in . . . Municipality of
Villaverde, Province of Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines and within the jurisdiction
of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused who [is] the father of the
offended party [AAA], and by means of force and intimidation, willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously did lie, and succeed [in] having carnal knowledge of
his daughter [AAA], a minor who was then under eighteen years against
her will and to her damage and prejudice.[4] (Underscoring supplied)
Criminal
Case No. 3349
That on or about 9:00 o’clock (sic) in the evening of December 6, 1997, in . . . Municipality of Villaverde, Province of
Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the above-named accused who [is] the father of the offended party [AAA],
and by means of force and intimidation, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously
did lie, and succeed [in] having carnal knowledge of his daughter [AAA], a
minor who was then under eighteen years against her will and to her
damage and prejudice.[5] (Underscoring supplied)
The
cases were jointly tried before Branch 27 of the Bayombong RTC.
Appellant
and ABC were married on June 7, 1980 out of which four children were born
including AAA, the complainant in the cases.
Complainant was born on
On
From
the evidence for the prosecution, the following version is gathered:
Around
Appellant
warned AAA not to report the matter to her maternal grandmother who was living four
meters away from their house; otherwise, if necessary, he might as well kill
someone (Haan ka nga agipulpulong kada Nanay mo, mabalbalin pumatayak
langngen ti tao.)[8]
On
As in the
past, appellant raised AAA’s shirt and brassiere. And he kissed and held her breasts. He then pulled down her short pants and
underwear afterwhich he also removed his short pants and underwear. While in a
slanting position on top of AAA, he inserted his penis into her vagina and made
pumping motions as he was kissing her neck.
Again AAA lost consciousness which she regained the following morning.[9]
Around
On
A
week later or on
In
the meantime, two other aunts of AAA, GHI and JKL, on reading the letter
addressed to the grandmother, looked for AAA and found her at the house of DEF. They then asked her “Did your father touch
you?” to which she answered in the affirmative.[13]
On
Four
days after ABC’s arrival in the
Extra-genital injuries |
-
no extra-genital injuries like hematoma, abrasion |
Orifice |
- admits 2.5 cm tube with ease |
Vaginal walls |
- tense |
Rugosities |
- prominent |
Uterus |
- small |
Cervix |
- soft closed , (-)
adnexag |
L areola |
- 2.5 cm |
L nipple |
- 1 cm |
R areola |
- 2.6 cm |
R nip[p]le |
- 1 cm |
Breast |
- hemispherical |
Pubic hair |
- occupies the anterior 3rd
labia (-) |
Labia M |
- gaping |
Labia Minora |
- gaping |
Fouchette |
- tensed |
Vestibule |
- pinkish |
Hymen |
- tall, thin |
#1 lacerations old healed superficial
#2 laceration old healed laceration complete
-
no
bleeding on manipulation
Pregnancy test – negative[15]
Hence,
the filing of the four informations for rape against appellant.
Appellant
denied the charges, interposing denial and alibi. The details of his version follow:
On
On
On
In
the morning of December 6, 1997, as AAA arrived home from a party she attended
the night before, he scolded her, telling her that she should be home taking
care of her sisters. AAA cried and
started writing something at the sala.[20]
Capping
his version, appellant claimed that his wife had an affair with Felixberto
Viernes, the former chief of police of Villaverde, and insinuated that she
instigated their daughter to fabricate charges against him so that he would be
sent to jail to leave her free to continue her extra-marital affair.
Finding for the
prosecution and accordingly convicting appellant, the trial court disposed:
WHEREFORE,
finding the accused Rolando Reyes y Nace GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in each
case of the four counts of Rape, he is hereby sentenced to death by lethal
injection in each of the cases filed against him; to pay the victim [AAA] the
sums of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral
damages in each count of rape, and to pay the costs of suit.[21]
In finding for the prosecution, the trial court noted the
victim’s narration to be “credible, consistent, straight-forward and in accord
with human experience, . . . often interrupted by her heart-rending sobs and
hysterics on the witness stand.”
[AAA’s] rendition of her testimony was that
of a victim of an unacceptable and horrendous fate because it was administered
by her own father, the supposed protector of her persona and her honor at
moments when she was supposed to be safe from harm and when she was hankering
for the love of her mother because she was working in a distant land. Nowhere
in her testimony was there any hint that the narration of her harrowing ordeal
was tainted by any influence other than the whole truth. Looking at her and
closely observing her deportment while she was relating the beastly conduct of
her parent removed any lingering doubt as to the veracity of her account. The
trial had to be suspended due to [AAA’s] hysterics and swooning (sic).
Whenever [AAA] narrated the details of her ravishments, invariably, she
would cry. Thus could not be the conduct of a coached actress, as the
Defense unfeelingly claimed.[22] (Underscoring supplied)
On appellant’s theory
that ABC merely instigated AAA to file the charges against him, the trial court
held:
. . .
No mother in her right senses will use her [teen-age] daughter and
expose her and herself to a lifetime of ridicule and obloquy just to remove an unwanted
husband. Moreover, no woman, like [AAA], would go through the ordeal of
allowing her womanhood to be examined and to be questioned in detail about a
very shameful experience unless her intent is to obtain justice for her
oppression and to punish the dastardly acts of her own father. No daughter would willingly and cold-bloodedly
send her own father to death or to a lifetime of imprisonment unless she was
telling the truth. And no daughter would willingly lend her hands to denounce
her own father for a heinous offense or have him sentenced to a very heavy
penalty in support of the infidelity of her mother.[23]
The
records of the cases were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. By Resolution[24]
of
By
Decision[26] of P75,000.00 and awarding P25,000.00
as exemplary damages in each case. Thus
it disposed:
WHEREFORE,
premises considered, the appealed decision dated January 11, 2002 of the
Regional Trial Court of Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya, Branch 27 in Criminal Case
Nos. 3346, 3347, 3348, and 3349, finding ROLANDO REYES y NACE guilty of four
(4) counts of Qualified Rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of DEATH
in each case, is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that he is ordered
to pay the amount of P75,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00
as exemplary damages in each case in addition to the P75,000.00
civil indemnity already awarded by the trial court.
In
accordance with A.M. NO. 00-5-03-SC which took effect on
After a considered review of the records of the cases, this
Court finds no reason to disturb the decision of the trial court, as affirmed
with modification by the Court of Appeals.
AAA’s credibility as a witness has not been
questioned. And her testimony is indeed credible
and consistent, and bears the earmarks of sincerity.
Upon the other hand, while appellant’s
denial and alibi are legitimate defenses, they are mere assertions, however;
hence, they cannot overcome the testimony of AAA.
The insinuation of appellant that his
wife instigated the filing of the charges against him, which is not uncommon in
rape cases, appears to be just a futile attempt to exonerate himself.[27]
. . .
Not a few persons convicted of rape have attributed the charges against them
to family feuds, resentment, or revenge. However, such alleged motives have
never swayed us from lending full credence to the testimony of a complainant
who remained steadfast through her direct and cross-examination. It is
unnatural for a parent to use her offspring as an instrument of malice,
especially if it will subject them to embarrassment and even stigma. No mother
in her right mind would expose her daughter to the disgrace and trauma resulting
from a prosecution for rape if she was not genuinely motivated by a desire to
incarcerate the person responsible for her daughter’s defilement.[28]
(Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Carnal knowledge of a woman under 18 years of age by a
parent is qualified rape. It is
punishable by death under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as
amended by Republic Act (RA) 7659 or the Death Penalty Law which governs the
June 4, 1997 and September 10, 1997 rape incidents; and Articles 266-A and
266-B, as amended by RA 8353 or the Anti-Rape Law which governs the November
30, 1997 and December 6, 1997 rape incidents.
To
justify the imposition of the death penalty in cases of incestuous rape,
concurrence of the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender
must both be alleged and proved with moral certainty.[29]
In the present cases, the prosecution alleged and
indubitably established the minority of AAA and her relationship to appellant
through the Certification-Exhibit “A”[30] issued
by the Office of the Municipal Civil Registrar of Villaverde, Nueva Vizcaya
stating that AAA was born on September 12, 1982 and that her father is
appellant. Appellant in fact admitted
that AAA is his daughter.[31]
RA 9346 (An Act
Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the
As to appellant’s civil liability, the appellate court correctly
modified the trial court’s decision by increasing the award of moral damages to
P75,000.00 and by awarding P25,000.00 as exemplary damages for
each case, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence.[32]
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that
appellant, ROLANDO REYES y NACE, is sentenced to suffer in each case the
penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.
Costs
against appellant.
SO ORDERED.
CONCHITA
CARPIO MORALES
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S.
PUNO
Chief Justice
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate Justice ANGELINA SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ Associate Justice |
CONSUELO YNARES- Associate Justice ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice |
MA. ALICIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ Associate Justice |
RENATO C. CORONA Associate Justice |
ROMEO J. CALLEJO, SR. Associate Justice DANTE O. TINGA Associate Justice |
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA Associate Justice MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIO Associate Justice |
CANCIO
C. GARCIA
Associate Justice |
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice |
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to
Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the
conclusions in the above Decision were reached in consultation before the case
was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
[1] The Court shall withhold the real name of
the victim and shall use fictitious initials instead to represent her.
Likewise, the personal circumstances of the victim or any other information
tending to establish or compromise her identities, as well those of their
immediate family or household members, shall not be disclosed. (People v.
Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693,
[2] Records, p. 2.
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7] Records, p. 137, Transcript of
Stenographic Notes (TSN),
[8] TSN,
[9] TSN,
[10] TSN,
[11] TSN, July16, 1998, pp. 12-17;
[12] TSN,
[13] TSN,
[14] TSN,
[15] Records, p. 69.
[16] TSN,
[17] TSN,
[18] TSN,
[19] TSN,
[20] TSN,
[21] Records, p. 400.
[22]
[23] Records, p. 396.
[24] CA rollo,
p. 214.
[25] G.R. No. 147678-87,
[26] CA rollo,
pp. 217-235. Penned by Justice Amelita
G. Tolentino and concurred in by Justices Roberto A. Barrios and Vicente S.E.
Velaso.
[27] People v. Cariñaga, 456 Phil. 944 (2003).
[28]
[29] People
v. Ancheta, G.R. No. 142431,
[30] Records, p. 9.
[31]
[32] People
v. Cabalquinto, supra note 1; People v.
Quiachon, G.R. No.170236,