Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1982 > August 1982 Decisions > G.R. No. L-42660 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO OLMEDILLO

201 Phil. 661:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-42660. August 30, 1982.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARSENIO OLMEDILLO, Accused-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Andres Regalado for Accused-Appellant.

SYNOPSIS


On her way home from school one afternoon, the fifteen-year-old Elsie Corre, was unexpectedly accosted by a man, unknown to her, who dragged her to a vacant lot nearby; forced her to lie down on the tall grasses; and after succeeding in gagging her and tying her hands despite her resistance, proceeded to have sexual congress with her. He then released Elsie but threatened to kill her if she told anybody of the incident. Because of that threat, it was not until after four months when Elsie revealed the outrage to her mother upon the latter noticing her pregnancy. Elsie and her mother went to the vacant lot where she was violated, and by some coincidence, a man looked out of his window. Elsie recognized him as the man who raped her and immediately pointed him to her mother. Her mother knew the man as the 65-year-old appellant. A doctor certified to Elsie’s pregnancy. A complaint for rape was filed against the appellant. While the case was pending in the fiscal’s office, appellant, through the barrio captain, tried to amicably settle with the mother of complainant, but she refused to settle. During trial, appellant denied the charge of rape interposing alibi, stating that he was home during the time of the incident, and claiming that he was impotent. The lower court convicted the appellant of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. Hence, this appeal.

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the judgment of the lower court. It held that alibi cannot be given credence because of the proximity of the accused’s house to the scene of the crime; that his identity as the rapist has been conclusively established not only by the victim who could not have fabricated the grave charge against him but also by his overtures for an amicable settlement; and that his defense of impotency has not been proven.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; ALIBI. — The accused’s alibi cannot be given any credence. His house was in close proximity to the place where the rape was perpetrated.

2. ID.; ID.; PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT IN CASE AT BAR. — We hold that his guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. It would be preposterous to assume that a guileless teenager like Elsie, whose intelligence quotient is admittedly low, could have fabricated the grave charge of rape, or that she and her mother would go into the trouble of having her medically examined, going to court and advertising to the whole world that she had been raped if the charge was merely invented. Any scintilla of doubt as to Olmedillo’s guilt was dissolved by his overtures for an amicable settlement which were made through the barrio captain whose testimony confirmed the version of Elsie and her mother that she was raped by Olmedillo. His identity as the rapist was thus conclusively established by his own conduct evidencing admission of guilt.

3. ID.; ID.; PRESUMPTIONS; IMPOTENCY, NOT TO BE PRESUMED. — Accused’s defense of impotency was not proven. The presumption is in favor of potency (Menciano v. Neri San Jose, 39 Phil. 63, 70).


D E C I S I O N


AQUINO, J.:


This is a rape case. At about five o’clock in the afternoon of December 2, 1972, Elsie Corre, who was then fifteen years and eight months old (she was born on March 20, 1957) and a fifth grade pupil in the central school of Naga City, was walking along Jacob Street after dismissal from school. She was going to her home in Sitio Argentina, Barrio Calawag, Naga City.

Unexpectedly, a man accosted her, seized her left hand and dragged her to a vacant lot nearby. Elsie screamed and struggled to free herself from the malefactor’s clutches.

He forced her to lie down on the tall grasses near a kapok tree, gagged her because she continued to shout and was able to tie her hands on her chest despite her resistance. He removed his pants and her panties, placed himself on top of her and had sexual congress with her.

After consummating the carnal intercourse, he untied her hands, removed the gag and released her but warned her that he would kill her if she revealed the incident to her parents or to other persons. Because of that threat, Elsie did not apprise her parents of the outrage when she arrived home at about six-thirty.

More than four months later, or on April 12, 1973, when Caridad Corre, Elsie’s mother, noticed that Elsie’s abdomen and breasts were enlarged, Caridad asked her who was responsible for her pregnancy. Elsie cried. Upon her mother’s insistence, she revealed that a man, whom she knew only by face, had ravished her. She said that she could identify the man if she saw him again and that she could point to the place where the incident occurred.

On that same day, Caridad brought Elsie to the hospital for a medical examination. On the way, while they were at the intersection of Jacob and Liboton Streets, waiting for transportation, Elsie pointed to her mother the vacant lot where she was violated. At that moment, by some coincidental happenstance, a man looked out of the window of the house near the lot. Elsie saw him and immediately pointed him to her mother as the malefactor who had wronged her.

Caridad knew the man as Arsenio Olmedillo, 65, married but living apart from his wife who was in Manila, a former postal employee and a resident of the place (84 Jacob Street). He was engaged in making rubber stamps.

At the hospital, the doctor, who examined Elsie, issued a medical certificate dated April 12, 1973 wherein he stated that Elsie’s breasts were engorged and hyperpigmented, that her lower abdomen was distended, with a "fundic height two fingers below navel", that her vagina admits two fingers easily, that her cervix was soft and not bleeding, that the lacerations of her hymen at the four and seven o’clock positions were healed and that there was no smear of spermatozoa in her vagina (Exh. B).

As a matter of fact, Elsie gave birth to a baby girl on September 15, 1973 or 288 days after Olmedillo allegedly had sexual intercourse with her (Exh. C).

A special counsel of the city fiscal’s office investigated the case. He took the affidavits of Elsie and her mother. Elsie filed a complaint for rape dated April 18, 1973 (Exh. E). The special counsel filed on December 4, 1973 an information for rape dated October 30, 1973.

While the case was still pending in the fiscal’s office, Olmedillo and the barrio captain of the Calawag district wrote a letter dated April 30, 1973, inviting Caridad Corre for a conference in the barrio captain’s house regarding the rape case (Exh. D).

The barrio captain, a friend of Olmedillo, testified that Olmedillo informed him that Olmedillo wanted an amicable settlement of the rape case, that he was willing to live with Elsie because he had carnal intercourse with her and that he was ready to assume responsibility for what he had done (8-9, tsn May 13, 1974). Mrs. Corre appeared at the house of the barrio captain but was not able to talk with Olmedillo. She told the barrio captain that she was not amenable to the amicable settlement of the case.

The barrio captain repeatedly testified that it was well-known in Barrio Calawag that Olmedillo raped Elsie while she was going home from school (19-16 tsn, May 13, 1974).

Mrs. Corre testified on rebuttal that Olmedillo came to see her in her house. Her son called Sergeant Soriano who arrested Olmedillo and brought him to the Constabulary headquarters where he admitted to the investigator that he had raped Elsie (41 tsn, July 30, 1974).

After trial the lower court convicted Olmedillo of simple rape, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay an indemnity of six thousand pesos to Elsie Corre and to support the child in the amount of fifty pesos a month until she reaches the age of majority or "is otherwise emancipated"

(Criminal Case No. 160).

Olmedillo appealed. He contends that the rape was not proven, that Olmedillo was not identified by Elsie as the rapist and that credence should have been given to his alibi that he was in his house finishing a rubber stamp when the rape was committed. The issue is whether Olmedillo was sufficiently identified as the rapist.

Olmedillo denied the rape. He declared that he was in his house when Elsie was raped. His neighbor corroborated his testimony.

He said that he had no more sexual urge at his age, that he could not have an erection (impotentia erigendi) and that he could not do the sexual act (impotentia coeundi). Doctor Raul M. Templonuevo, a surgeon who had practised medicine for six years, examined Olmedillo to find out whether he was sexually potent. He stimulated Olmedillo’s organ with a wisp of cotton for three minutes. Olmedillo did not have any erection.

But Doctor Templonuevo did not conclude that Olmedillo was sexually impotent. He advised Olmedillo’s counsel to consult a more competent physician who could evaluate the sexual potency of Olmedillo. He found that Olmedillo was suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis. The doctor conceded that tuberculous persons tend to have increased sexual desire.

Olmedillo denied that he wanted an amicable settlement of the rape case. He declared that he was accused of rape because Mrs. Corre assumed that he could support Elsie’s child.

We hold that his guilt was proven reasonable doubt. His alibi cannot be given any credence. His house was in close proximity to the place where the rape was perpetrated. It would be preposterous to assume that a guileless teenager like Elsie, whose intelligence quotient is admittedly low, could have fabricated the grave charge of rape, or that she and her mother would go into the trouble of having her medically examined, going to court and advertising to the whole world that she had been raped if the charge was merely invented.

Any scintilla of doubt as to Olmedillo’s guilt was dissolved by his overtures for an amicable settlement which were made through the barrio captain whose testimony confirmed the version of Elsie and her mother that she was raped by Olmedillo. His identity as the rapist was thus conclusively established by his own conduct evincing admission of guilt.

His defense of impotency was not proven. The presumption is in favor of potency (Menciano v. Neri San Jose, 89 Phil. 63, 70). The trial court noted that Olmedillo did not have the appearance of a sick man. It ratiocinated that because Elsie has a weak mind "she could not have been taught by anybody to tell lies" and that "her identification of the accused as well as the simple description of how the rape was perpetrated constituted the truth"

The ocular inspection of the scene of the crime revealed that the vacant lot has an area of 2,844 square yards. It was full of cogon and talahib grass. The trial court concluded that rape could have been committed in that lot without causing any commotion.

WHEREFORE, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed. Costs against the Accused-Appellant.

SO ORDERED.

Concepcion Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro and Escolin, JJ., concur.

Barredo, J., is on leave.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






August-1982 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. 921-MJ August 19, 1982 - ANTONIO C. LUCERO v. CARLOS B. SALAZAR

    201 Phil. 396

  • A.M. No. P-1518 August 19, 1982 - EROTIDO O. DOMINGO v. ROMEO R. QUIMSON

  • A.M. No. 2247-MJ August 19, 1982 - PEDRO G. VALENTIN v. MARIANO P. GONZALES

    201 Phil. 401

  • A.M. No. 2385-MJ August 19, 1982 - JONATHAN A. LUZURIAGA v. JESUS B. BROMO

    201 Phil. 408

  • G.R. No. L-34081 August 19, 1982 - PHIL. SUGAR INSTITUTE v. ASSOC. OF PHILSUGIN EMPLOYEES

    201 Phil. 416

  • G.R. No. L-35440 August 19, 1982 - RUFINO GERALDE v. ANDRES Y. SABIDO

    201 Phil. 418

  • G.R. No. L-38352 August 19, 1982 - ADELA J. CAÑOS v. E.L. PERALTA

    201 Phil. 422

  • G.R. No. L-46499 August 19, 1982 - TRADE UNIONS OF THE PHIL. AND ALLIED SERVICES v. AMADO G. INCIONG

    201 Phil. 427

  • G.R. No. L-48057 August 19, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICTORIO VENEZUELA

    201 Phil. 433

  • G.R. No. L-50402 August 19, 1982 - PHIL. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL BANK v. NAT’L. MINES & ALLIED WORKERS UNION

    201 Phil. 441

  • G.R. No. L-51194 August 19, 1982 - CENTRAL AZUCARERA DE LA CARLOTA, INC. v. AMADO G. INCIONG

    201 Phil. 451

  • G.R. No. L-51494 August 19, 1982 - JUDRIC CANNING CORPORATION v. AMADO G. INCIONG

    201 Phil. 456

  • G.R. No. L-52720 August 19, 1982 - UNITED CMC TEXTILE WORKERS UNION v. JACOBO C. CLAVE

    201 Phil. 463

  • G.R. No. L-58287 August 19, 1982 - EDUARDO VILLANUEVA v. LORENZO MOSQUEDA

    201 Phil. 474

  • G.R. No. L-60067 August 19, 1982 - SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

    201 Phil. 477

  • G.R. No. L-26940 August 21, 1982 - PAULINA SANTOS, ET AL. v. GREGORIA ARANZANSO, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 481

  • G.R. No. L-27130 August 21, 1982 - PAULINA SANTOS DE PARREÑO v. JULIO VILLAMOR, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 487

  • G.R. No. L-30697 August 2, 1982 - GILBERTO M. DUAVIT v. HERMINIO MARIANO

    201 Phil. 488

  • G.R. No. L-35705 August 21, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICARDO M. UMALI

    201 Phil. 494

  • G.R. No. L-36222 August 21, 1982 - AUGUST O. BERNARTE, ET AL. v. SECRETARY OF NATIONAL DEFENSE, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 513

  • G.R. No. L-39007 August 21, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CAMILO RAMIREZ

    201 Phil. 519

  • G.R. No. L-40621 August 21, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AQUILINO PADUNAN

    201 Phil. 525

  • G.R. No. L-56962 August 21, 1982 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ANDRES B. PLAN

    201 Phil. 541

  • G.R. No. L-58805 August 21, 1982 - ROMULO BOLAÑOS, ET AL. v. RAFAEL DELA CRUZ, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 549

  • G.R. No. L-59493 August 21, 1982 - MANUEL SAN ANDRES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 552

  • G.R. No. L-59823 August 21, 1982 - GETZ CORPORATION PHILS., INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 558

  • G.R. No. L-38753 August 25, 1982 - RAFAEL S. MERCADO v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL, BRANCH V, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 565

  • G.R. No. L-44031 August 26, 1982 - SONIA VILLONES v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 574

  • G.R. No. L-47099 August 26, 1982 - IGNACIO DELOS ANGELES v. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 581

  • G.R. No. L-59582 August 26, 1982 - JESUS M. PAMAN v. RODRIGO DIAZ, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 597

  • A.M. No. 78-MJ August 30, 1982 - BUENAVENTURA B. MARTINEZ v. TEODORO O. PAHIMULIN

    201 Phil. 602

  • A.M. No. P-1722 August 30, 1982 - BENIGNO CABALLERO v. WALTER VILLANUEVA

    201 Phil. 606

  • G.R. No. L-25933 August 30, 1982 - PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY v. FREE TELEPHONE WORKERS UNION, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 611

  • G.R. No. L-27657 August 30, 1982 - PAULINA SANTOS DE PARREÑ0 v. GREGORIA ARANZANSO

    201 Phil. 623

  • G.R. No. L-29268 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CESARIO C. GOLEZ, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 632

  • G.R. No. L-33515 August 30, 1982 - J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. RAYMUND FAMILARA

    201 Phil. 635

  • G.R. No. L-37686 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN L. ARCENAL

    201 Phil. 640

  • G.R. No. L-39298 August 30, 1982 - SULPICIO G. PAREDES v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 644

  • G.R. No. L-41700 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICARTE SIBAYAN

    201 Phil. 648

  • G.R. No. L-42447 August 30, 1982 - PIONEER INSURANCE AND SURETY CORPORATION v. SERAFIN E. CAMILON

    201 Phil. 658

  • G.R. No. L-42660 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO OLMEDILLO

    201 Phil. 661

  • G.R. No. L-43427 August 30, 1982 - FELIPE N. CRISOSTOMO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 666

  • G.R. No. L-45472 August 30, 1982 - HEIRS OF SATURNINA AKUT v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 680

  • G.R. No. L-46762 August 30, 1982 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES SUPERVISORS’ ASSOCIATION v. AMADO GAT INCIONG, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 689

  • G.R. No. L-48975 August 30, 1982 - RAFAEL B. MAGPANTAY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 702

  • G.R. No. L-54068 and 54142 August 30, 1982 - ST. LUKE’S HOSPITAL, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 706

  • G.R. No. L-54094 August 30, 1982 - ALABANG DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ET AL. v. MANUEL E. VALENZUELA, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 727

  • G.R. No. L-54760 August 30, 1982 - MICAELA C. AGGABAO v. LETICIA U. GAMBOA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-55801 August 30, 1982 - LEONARDO MAGAT v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-56973 August 30, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SABENIANO LOBETANIA

    201 Phil. 762

  • G.R. No. L-56995 August 30, 1982 - RAYMUNDO R. LIBRODO v. JOSE L. COSCOLLUELA, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-59548 August 30, 1982 - DAVAO LIGHT & POWER CO., INC. v. PACITA CAÑIZARES-NYE

    201 Phil. 777

  • G.R. No. L-59821 August 30, 1982 - ROWENA F. CORONA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 782

  • G.R. No. L-60342 August 30, 1982 - FRANCISCO S. BANAAD v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 788

  • G.R. No. L-28237 August 31, 1982 - BAY VIEW HOTEL, INC. v. KER & CO., LTD., ET AL.

    201 Phil. 794

  • G.R. No. L-29971 August 31, 1982 - ESSO STANDARD EASTERN, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 803

  • G.R. No. L-32437 August 31, 1982 - SALANDANG PANGADIL, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF COTABATO, BRANCH I, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 813

  • G.R. No. L-36759 August 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NECESIO IMBO

    201 Phil. 821

  • G.R. No. L-37935 August 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CLEMENTE GANADO

    201 Phil. 828

  • G.R. No. L-38687 August 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FILOMENO HISUGAN

    201 Phil. 836

  • G.R. No. L-39777 August 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIX ATIENZA

    201 Phil. 844

  • G.R. No. L-44707 August 31, 1982 - HICKOK MANUFACTURING CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 853

  • G.R. No. L-59887 August 31, 1982 - CHINA BANKING CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 857

  • G.R. No. L-60687 August 31, 1982 - PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANY v. MINERVA C. GENOVEA

    201 Phil. 862

  • G.R. No. L-60800 August 31, 1982 - JAIME PELEJO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 873

  • G.R. No. L-60987 August 31, 1982 - SAMUEL BAUTISTA v. NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

    201 Phil. 879