ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
February-1997 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 99039 February 3, 1997 - FORD PHIL., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100748 February 3, 1997 - JOSE BARITUA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108547 February 3, 1997 - FELICIDAD VDA. DE CABRERA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 112761-65 February 3, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PORFERIO M. PEPITO

  • G.R. No. 114183 February 3, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS BORJA

  • G.R. No. 119310 February 3, 1997 - JULIETA V. ESGUERRA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119935 February 3, 1997 - UNITED SOUTH DOCKHANDLERS, INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122156 February 3, 1997 - MANILA PRINCE HOTEL v. GSIS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123332 February 3, 1997 - AUGUSTO GATMAYTAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118915 February 4, 1997 - CAPITOL MEDICAL CENTER-ACE-UFSW v. BIENVENIDO LAGUESMA, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-94-1110 February 6, 1997 - MELENCIO S. SY v. CARMELITA S. MONGCUPA

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1203 February 6, 1997 - ERNESTO A. REYES v. NORBERTO R. ANOSA

  • G.R. No. 110668 February 6, 1997 ccc zz

    SMITH, BELL & CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111682 February 6, 1997 - ZENAIDA REYES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117982 February 6, 1997 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118843 February 6, 1997 - ERIKS PTE. LTD. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 118950-54 February 6, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LUCRECIA GABRES

  • G.R. No. 119322 February 6, 1997 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98252 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENE JANUARIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110391 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOLORES DE LEON

  • G.R. No. 112191 February 7, 1997 - FORTUNE MOTORS (PHILS.) CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 112714-15 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO SAGARAL

  • G.R. No. 117472 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEO ECHEGARAY

  • G.R. No. 119657 February 7, 1997 - UNIMASTERS CONGLOMERATION, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 119772-73 February 7, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NIGEL RICHARD GATWARD

  • G.R. No. 125249 February 7, 1997 - JIMMY S. DE CASTRO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-95-1161 February 10, 1997 - JESUS N. BANDONG v. BELLA R. CHING

  • G.R. No. 108894 February 10, 1997 - TECNOGAS PHIL. MFG. CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109887 February 10, 1997 - CECILIA CARLOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117702 February 10, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN YPARRAGUIRRE

  • G.R. No. 124553 February 10, 1997 - ROSARIO R. TUASON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-95-1070 February 12, 1997 - MARIA APIAG, ET AL. v. ESMERALDO G. CANTERO

  • Adm. Matter No. P-87-100 February 12, 1997 - FELISA ELIC VDA. DE ABELLERA v. NEMESIO N. DALISAY

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1231 February 12, 1997 - ISAIAS P. DICDICAN v. RUSSO FERNAN, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68166 February 12, 1997 - HEIRS OF EMILIANO NAVARRO v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 104666 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO OMBROG

  • G.R. No. 115129 February 12, 1997 - IGNACIO BARZAGA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116511 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. COLOMA TABAG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118025 February 12, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REBECCO SATOR

  • G.R. No. 120769 February 12, 1997 - STANLEY J. FORTICH v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125531 February 12, 1997 - JOVAN LAND v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126013 February 12, 1997 - HEINZRICH THEIS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107554 February 13, 1997 - CEBU INT’L. FINANCE CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108763 February 13, 1997 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112968 February 13, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO LETIGIO

  • G.R. No. 114144 February 13, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO ABAD

  • G.R. Nos. 114711 & 115889 February 13, 1997 - GARMENTS and TEXTILE EXPORT BOARD v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122728 February 13, 1997 - CASIANO A. ANGCHANGCO v. OMBUDSMAN, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-96-217 February 17, 1997 - MANUEL F. CONCEPCION v. JESUS V. AGANA, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ 97-1369 February 17, 1997 - OCTAVIO DEL CALLAR v. IGNACIO L. SALVADOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 103501-03 & 103507 February 17, 1997 - LUIS A. TABUENA v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119247 February 17, 1997 - CESAR SULIT v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119536 February 17, 1997 - GLORIA S. DELA CRUZ v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121017 February 17, 1997 - OLIVIA B. CAMANAG v. JESUS F. GUERRERO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122165 February 17, 1997 - ALA MODE GARMENTS, INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123823 February 17, 1997 - MODESTO G. ESPAÑO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96249 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALIPIO QUIAMCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114396 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILLIAM ROBERT BURTON

  • G.R. No. 118140 February 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE PIANDIONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121084 February 19, 1997 - TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. CORP. v. TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. CORP. LABOR UNION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107916 February 20, 1997 - PERCIVAL MODAY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112288 February 20, 1997 - DELSAN TRANSPORT LINES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-94-1034 February 21, 1997 - LEWELYN S. ESTRELLER v. SOFRONIO MANATAD, JR.

  • G.R. No. 73399 February 21, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAMON ABEDES

  • G.R. No. 117394 February 21, 1997 - HINATUAN MINING CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. SDC-97-2-P February 24, 1997 - SOPHIA ALAWI v. ASHARY M. ALAUYA

  • G.R. No. 110427 February 24, 1997 - CARMEN CAÑIZA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-1195 February 26, 1997 - ROMEO NAZARENO, ET AL. v. ENRIQUE M. ALMARIO

  • G.R. No. 94237 February 26, 1997 - BUILDING CARE CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105294 February 26, 1997 - PACITA DAVID-CHAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107671 February 26, 1997 - REMMAN ENTERPRISES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109849 February 26, 1997 - MAXIMINO FUENTES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110098 February 26, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BUENAFE AZUGUE

  • G.R. No. 111538 February 26, 1997 - PARAÑAQUE KINGS ENTERPRISES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116033 February 26, 1997 - ALFREDO L. AZARCON v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123404 February 26, 1997 - AURELIO SUMALPONG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-97-1368 February 27, 1997 - ERNESTO RIEGO, ET AL. v. EMILIO LEACHON, JR.

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 117702   February 10, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN YPARRAGUIRRE

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 117702. February 10, 1997.]

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CRISPIN YPARRAGUIRRE, Accused-Appellant.

    The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

    Richard C. Miguel for Accused-Appellant.


    SYLLABUS


    1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; WITNESS; CREDIBILITY; UPHELD IN CASE AT BAR. — After reviewing the records, we find that the prosecution evidence, which rests mainly on the testimony of Rosita Bacaling, is credible, reliable and trustworthy. Rosita testified in a straightforward, spontaneous and candid manner and never wavered even on cross-examination and rebuttal. The inconsistencies in her testimony are minor which tend to buttress, rather than weaken, the conclusion that her testimony was not contrived. Further, it is hard to believe that Rosita would fabricate a story of defloration, open herself to public trial and place her family, who depended on her, in a very humiliating and compromising situation for no reason at all.

    2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; NOT AFFECTED BY DELAY IN FILING OF COMPLAINT. — The delay in filing the complaint does not in any way affect Rosita’s credibility. She was afraid of appellant’s threat to her life. The complaint was filed three months after Rosita told her mother of the incident, and three months is not too long a period to file a complaint for rape.

    3. ID.; ID.; OFFER TO COMPROMISE EVEN BEFORE FILING OF COMPLAINT; ADMISSIBLE. — There is evidence that after Rosita revealed the rape to her mother, appellant’s wife offered the victim’s mother fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.00) to dissuade her from filing the complaint. An offer to compromise does not require that a criminal complaint be first filed before the offer can be received in evidence against the offeror. What is required is that after committing the crime, the accused or his representative makes an offer to compromise and such offer is proved.

    4. ID.; ID.; POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION PREVAILS OVER ALIBI. — The positive identification of accused-appellant as the rapist prevails over his defense of alibi. It was not physically impossible for appellant to have been at the scene of the crime as the public market was merely a ten-minute walk from their rented room and during work breaks, appellant would sometimes go home to bring food to his children.


    D E C I S I O N


    PUNO, J.:


    Accused-appellant Crispin Yparraguirre was charged with the crime of rape in an Information that reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "That on or about July 6, 1950, in the Municipality of Panabo, Province of Davao, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a hunting knife, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of Rosita Bacaling, against her will." 1

    The prosecution established that Rosita Bacaling was a housemaid of appellant and his wife; that on or about 7:00 in the evening of July 6, 1990 at the spouses’ room in Panabo, Davao, Rosita was cooking porridge for the spouses’ two children, one aged four years old and the other nine months old. Accused-appellant arrived from work and found the two children asleep. He approached Rosita and gave her a small white envelope said to contain medicine for her skin disease. Rosita was afflicted with rashes on her thighs and stomach which she allegedly contracted from one of the children. Rosita opened the envelope and counted fifteen (15) tablets inside. As instructed by appellant, Rosita took all the tablets. A few minutes later, she felt weak and fell down. Suddenly, she realized that appellant was dragging her to the spouses’ bed. She tried to get up but appellant pushed her down the bed and pointed a hunting knife at her neck. He ordered Rosita not to move or he would kill her. Then he removed her clothes and went on top of her. He kissed her face, breasts, stomach and private parts and then entered her. Rosita cried out in pain but appellant continued entering her. After satisfying his lust, appellant pulled out and punched Rosita in the stomach. She lost consciousness

    A few minutes later, Rosita woke up and saw blood in her private parts. She wiped the blood and changed her clothes. Seeing her awake, appellant threatened to kill her should she report the incident to her parents. Appellant then left the house. 2

    Rosita did not say a word about the incident. She continued serving the Yparraguirres for one month before leaving them to return to her mother’s house in Barrio Cagangohan. Her mother found Rosita in a state of shock. She could not eat nor talk, neither could she perform ordinary daily functions such as dressing herself. In short, Rosita became helpless. She was brought to the Municipal Health Officer by her mother for examination. On August 22, 1990, the Municipal Health Officer, Dr. Imelda T. Bendijo, interviewed the girl and found her unresponsive and unable to talk. She conducted a physical examination and also found that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    ". . . Physical examination externally no abnormal findings;

    Pelvic examination — normal vagina with old laceration found at 2:00 [position]; hymen not intact;

    Internal examination — admits one finger;

    Advised for pregnancy test and for consultation by [sic] psychiatrist.

    x       x       x." 3

    Upon the Municipal Health Officer’s advice, Rosita was confined at the Davao City Mental Hospital for observation and treatment. After a week of treatment, Rosita began to talk and revealed that she was raped by appellant. 4

    Accused-appellant pled not guilty to the crime charged. He claimed that on the night of the alleged rape he was selling fish at the public market. Allegedly, he was at the market at 4:00 in the morning, and worked straight until 8:00 in the evening. He never left the fish stall until after 8:00 in the evening because of his many customers. 5chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary:red

    The trial court found accused-appellant guilty and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. It also ordered him to indemnify Rosita Bacaling P50,000.00 as moral damages and pay P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees, thus:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "WHEREFORE, IN LIGHT OF THE FOREGOING, the court finds accused Crispin Yparraguirre guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape punishable under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Correspondingly, the court hereby sentences the said accused to suffer and undergo the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA with all the accessory penalties provided for by law and to pay the costs.

    Accused Crispin Yparraguirre is also ordered to indemnify the victim Rosita Bacaling the amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages, plus payment of P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees.

    SO ORDERED." 6

    In this appeal, Accused-appellant contends that:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    I


    "THE COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF RAPE;

    II


    THE COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT WITNESS MARY ANN YPARRAGUIRRE WENT TO THE MOTHER OF THE ACCUSED ON NOVEMBER 23, 1990 TO NEGOTIATE FOR THE DROPPING OF THE CASE." 7

    The appeal has no merit. After reviewing the records, we find that the prosecution evidence, which rests mainly on the testimony of Rosita Bacaling, is credible, reliable and trustworthy. Rosita testified in a straightforward, spontaneous and candid manner and never wavered even on cross-examination and rebuttal. The inconsistencies in her testimony are minor which tend to buttress, rather than weaken, the conclusion that her testimony was not contrived. 8

    The question of whether Rosita contracted the skin disease from the children of appellant is not important. The undisputed fact is that she was afflicted with the disease and that appellant gave her tablets for treatment of the disease. Appellant’s allegation that Rosita should have fallen asleep for hours after ingesting the tablets is speculative. There is no evidence that the tablets were sleeping tablets. They, however, weakened Rosita and prevented her from making any resistance to appellant’s lewd acts. 9 The delay in filing the complaint does not in any way affect Rosita’s credibility. 10 She was afraid of appellant’s threat to her life. The complaint was filed three months after Rosita told her mother of the incident, and three months is not too long a period to file a complaint for rape.

    Rosita was a seventeen-year old barrio lass and a high school dropout. She was also the breadwinner of the family. 11 It is hard to believe that Rosita would fabricate a story of defloration, open herself to public trial and place her family, who depended on her, in a very humiliating and compromising situation for no reason at all. 12 Rosita suffered psychologically from the incident. Before the rape, she had been working for the Yparraguirres for two months 13 and the spouses actually found her to be a good worker. 14 When Rosita returned to her family, however, she lost her speech and could not perform ordinary daily functions that she had to seek psychiatric treatment. Indeed, Rosita’s psychological condition could not have been the product of ill-motive and fabrication.

    Anent the second assigned error, there is evidence that after Rosita revealed the rape to her mother, appellant’s wife, Mary Ann Yparraguirre, offered the victim’s mother, Merlyn Bacaling, fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000.00) to dissuade her from filing the complaint. 15 When Merlyn refused, Mary Ann increased the offer to twenty-five thousand pesos (P25,000.00). Still Merlyn refused to accept it. 16 As pointed out by appellant, no criminal complaint had been filed at the time the compromise offer was made. Nevertheless, the rape incident was already known to appellant’s wife. Mary Ann herself testified that Merlyn told her about it on November 3, 1990, the day when Mary Ann first offered the money. 17 An offer to compromise does not require that a criminal complaint be first filed before the offer can be received in evidence against the offeror. 18 What is required is that after committing the crime, the accused or his representative makes an offer to compromise and such offer is proved.

    The positive identification of accused-appellant as the rapist prevails over his defense of alibi. 19 It was not physically impossible for appellant to have been at the scene of the crime. The public market was merely a ten-minute walk from their rented room 20 and during work breaks, appellant would sometimes go home to bring food to his children. 21

    IN VIEW WHEREOF, the decision dated May 10, 1994 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 4, Panabo, Davao is affirmed. Costs against Appellant.

    SO ORDERED.

    Regalado, Romero, Mendoza and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    1. Information dated July 8, 1991, Rollo, p. 3.

    2. TSN of October 22, 1991, pp. 7-19.

    3. Exhibit "A," Records, p. 12.

    4. TSN of October 22, 1991, pp. 20-22.

    5. TSN of May 7, 1993, pp. 10-11; TSN of February 3, 1993, pp. 5-9.

    6. Decision dated May 10, 1994, p. 19, Rollo, p. 29.

    7. Appellant’s Brief, p. 1, Rollo, p. 76.

    8. People v. Ching, 240 SCRA 267 [1995]; People v. Querido, 229 SCRA 745 [1994]; People v. de la Cruz, 224 SCRA 506 [1993]; People v. Caco, 222 SCRA 49 [1993].

    9. TSN of October 23, 1991, pp. 15-16.

    10. People v. Cabresos, 244 SCRA 362 [1995]; People v. Plaza, 242 SCRA 724 [1995]; People v. Casil, 241 SCRA 285 [1995].

    11. Rosita had three sisters and one brother — TSN of October 23, 1991, p. 12.

    12. People v. Vitor, 245 SCRA 392 [1995]; People v. Dado, 244 SCRA 655 [1995]; People v. Querido, 229 SCRA 745 [1994]; People v. Codilla, 224 SCRA 104 [1993].

    13. TSN of October 22, 1991, pp. 6-7.

    14. TSN of May 7, 1993, p. 18; TSN of December 20, 1993, p. 8.

    15. TSN of October 19, 1993, pp. 6-7.

    16. TSN of October 19, 1993, pp. 6-8.

    17. TSN of December 20, 1993, pp. 4-5.

    18. Revised Rules on Evidence, Rule 130, Section 27, paragraph 2 reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Sec. 27. . . .

    In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.

    x       x       x."cralaw virtua1aw library

    19. People v. Umali, 242 SCRA 17 [1995]; People v. Miranday, 242 SCRA 620 [1995]; People v. Cabresos, 244 SCRA 362 [1995].

    20. TSN of May 7, 1993, pp. 11-12.

    21. Id., p. 14.

    G.R. No. 117702   February 10, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN YPARRAGUIRRE


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED