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
 

   
June-2001 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. P-00-1446 June 6, 2001 - PATERNO R. PLANTILLA v. RODRIGO G. BALIWAG

  • A.M. No. P-91-642 June 6, 2001 - SOLEDAD LAURO v. EFREN LAURO

  • G.R. No. 92328 June 6, 2001 - DAP MINING ASSO. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100579 June 6, 2001 - LEANDRO P. GARCIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113918 June 6, 2001 - MARCELINA G. TRINIDAD, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121272 June 6, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYDERICK LAGO

  • G.R. No. 122353 June 6, 2001 - EVANGELINE DANAO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129534 & 141169 June 6, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR MACANDOG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138949 June 6, 2001 - UNION BANK OF THE PHIL. v. SEC

  • G.R. No. 138971 June 6, 2001 - PEZA v. RUMOLDO R FERNANDEZ

  • G.R. No. 139034 June 6, 2001 - DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139323 June 6, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CARLO ELLASOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140128 June 6, 2001 - ARNOLD P. MOLLANEDA v. LEONIDA C. UMACOB

  • G.R. No. 140277 June 6, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. GUILLERMO BALDAGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 141529 June 6, 2001 - FRANCISCO YAP, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142888 June 6, 2001 - EVELIO P. BARATA v. BENJAMIN ABALOS JR.

  • G.R. No. 143561 June 6, 2001 - JONATHAN D. CARIAGA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110335 June 18, 2001 - IGNACIO GONZALES, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1615 June 19, 2001 - WINNIE BAJET v. PEDRO M. AREOLA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1633 June 19, 2001 - ANTONIO and ELSA FORTUNA v. MA. NIMFA PENACO-SITACA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 99433 June 19, 2001 - PROJECT BUILDERS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114944 June 19, 2001 - MANUEL C. ROXAS, ET AL. v. CONRADO M. VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120701 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JONATHAN CRISANTO

  • G.R. No. 123916 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LYNTON ASUNCION

  • G.R. No. 130605 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIX UGANAP, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132160 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO DE LEON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132223 June 19, 2001 - BONIFACIA P. VANCIL v. HELEN G. BELMES

  • G.R. No. 134895 June 19, 2001 - STA. LUCIA REALTY and DEV’T., ET AL. v. LETICIA CABRIGAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137164 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERT NUBLA

  • G.R. No. 137752 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERT AYUNGON

  • G.R. Nos. 138298 & 138982 June 19, 2001 - RAOUL B. DEL MAR v. PAGCOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139313 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORANTE LEAL

  • G.R. No. 140690 June 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NAZAR U. CHAVEZ

  • G.R. No. 141441 June 19, 2001 - JOSE SUAN v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 00-10-230-MTCC June 20, 2001 - RE: JULIAN C. OCAMPO III AND RENATO C. SAN JUAN

  • A.M. No. 00-11-521-RTC June 20, 2001 - RE: AWOL OF MS. LILIAN B. BANTOG

  • A.M. No. P-99-1346 June 20, 2001 - RESTITUTO L. CASTRO v. CARLOS BAGUE

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1606 June 20, 2001 - PATRIA MAQUIRAN v. LILIA G. LOPEZ

  • G.R. No. 84831 June 20, 2001 - PACENCIO ABEJARON v. FELIX NABASA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109666 June 20, 2001 - ROGERIO R. OLAGUER, ET AL. v. EUFEMIO DOMINGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113564 June 20, 2001 - INOCENCIA YU DINO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115851 June 20, 2001 - LA JOLLA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127129 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO CABAYA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128617 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CESAR BACUS

  • G.R. Nos. 129292-93 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARLENGEN DEGALA

  • G.R. No. 130524 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUDY MADIA

  • G.R. No. 131036 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DONATO DEL ROSARIO

  • G.R. Nos. 135976-80 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CLAUDIO GALENO

  • G.R. No. 138629 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAMON CAMACHO

  • G.R. No. 139430 June 20, 2001 - EDI STAFF BUILDERS INTERNATIONAL v. FERMINA D. MAGSINO

  • G.R. Nos. 139445-46 June 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODRIGO GONZALES

  • G.R. No. 142304 June 20, 2001 - CITY OF MANILA v. OSCAR SERRANO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-01-1342 June 21, 2001 - BISHOP CRISOSTOMO A. YALUNG, ET AL. v. ENRIQUE M. PASCUA

  • G.R. No. 108558 June 21, 2001 - ANDREA TABUSO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109197 June 21, 2001 - JAYME C. UY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 111580 & 114802 June 21, 2001 - SHANGRI-LA INTERNATIONAL HOTEL MNGT. LTD. ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 116200-02 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELEUTERIO TAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 131131 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ABELARDO SALONGA

  • G.R. No. 134138 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDMUNDO BRIONES AYTALIN

  • G.R. Nos. 135552-53 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ABEL ABACIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139542 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. INOCENCIO GONZALEZ

  • G.R. No. 140206 June 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO MATYAONG

  • G.R. No. 142023 June 21, 2001 - SANNY B. GINETE v. SUNRISE MANNING AGENCY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 103068 June 22, 2001 - MEAT PACKING CORP. OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-96-1110 June 25, 2001 - MANUEL N. MAMBA, ET AL. v. DOMINADOR L. GARCIA

  • G.R. No. 116710 June 25, 2001 - DANILO D. MENDOZA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117857 June 25, 2001 - LUIS S. WONG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128126 June 25, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAFAEL M. CATAPANG

  • G.R. No. 132051 June 25, 2001 - TALA REALTY SERVICES CORP. v. BANCO FILIPINO SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK

  • G.R. No. 134068 June 25, 2001 - UNION BANK OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136221 June 25, 2001 - EQUATORIAL REALTY DEVELOPMENT v. MAYFAIR THEATER

  • G.R. No. 136382 June 25, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FIDEL ALBORIDA

  • G.R. Nos. 138439-41 June 25, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO PANGANIBAN

  • G.R. No. 141141 June 25, 2001 - PAGCOR v. CARLOS P. RILLORAZA

  • G.R. No. 141801 June 25, 2001 - SOLOMON ALVAREZ v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 143428 June 25, 2001 - SANDOVAL SHIPYARDS, ET AL. v. PRISCO PEPITO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 99-11-423-RTC June 26, 2001 - RE: Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted in the Regional Trial Court

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1461 June 26, 2001 - RICARDO DELA CRUZ v. HERMINIA M. PASCUA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1486 June 26, 2001 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. ISMAEL SANCHEZ

  • G.R. Nos. 110547-50 & 114526-667 June 26, 2001 - JOSE SAYSON v. SANDIGANBAYAN ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120859 June 26, 2001 - METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. FRANCISCO Y. WONG

  • G.R. No. 123542 June 26, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO BULOS

  • G.R. Nos. 132848-49 June 26, 2001 - PHILROCK v. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARBITRATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133990 June 26, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HECTOR MARIANO

  • G.R. No. 134764 June 26, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. BENJAMIN FABIA

  • G.R. Nos. 139626-27 June 26, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO DELA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. 143204 June 26, 2001 - HYATT TAXI SERVICES INC. v. RUSTOM M. CATINOY

  • G.R. Nos. 147589 & 147613 June 26, 2001 - ANG BAGONG BAYANI-OFW LABOR PARTY, ET AL. v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130661 June 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO I. TORRES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135882 June 27, 2001 - LOURDES T. MARQUEZ v. ANIANO A. DESIERTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140001 June 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO BUENAFLOR

  • A.C. No. 3910 June 28, 2001 - JOSE S. DUCAT v. ARSENIO C. VILLALON, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 4073 June 28, 2001 - ARACELI SIPIN-NABOR v. BENJAMIN BATERINA

  • A.M. No. P-01-1480 June 28, 2001.

    AMADO S. CAGUIOA v. CRISANTO FLORA

  • A.M. No. P-99-1343 June 28, 2001 - ORLANDO T. MENDOZA v. ROSBERT M. TUQUERO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1576 June 28, 2001 - SIMPLICIO ALIB v. EMMA C. LABAYEN

  • G.R. No. 105364 June 28, 2001 - PHIL. VETERANS BANK EMPLOYEES UNION-N.U.B.E., ET AL. v. BENJAMIN VEGA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110813 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO PARDUA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110914 June 28, 2001 - ALFREDO CANUTO; JR., ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 112453-56 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERARDO LATUPAN

  • G.R. Nos. 112563 & 110647 June 28, 2001 - HEIRS OF KISHINCHAND HIRANAND DIALDAS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120630 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELO PALERMO

  • G.R. No. 131954 June 28, 2001 - ASELA B. MONTECILLO, ET AL v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. Nos. 132026-27 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO ABENDAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132362 June 28, 2001 - PIO BARRETTO REALTY DEV’T. CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132837 June 28, 2001 - JO CINEMA CORP., ET AL. v. LOLITA C. ABELLANA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133605 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN BARRIAS

  • G.R. No. 135846 June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. NOEL ORTEGA

  • G.R. No. 138270 June 28, 2001 - SEA POWER SHIPPING ENTERPRISES INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142314 June 28, 2001 - MC ENGINEERING, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143723 June 28, 2001 - LITONJUA GROUP OF CO.’s., ET AL. v. TERESITA VIGAN

  • G.R. No. 144113 June 28, 2001 - EDWEL MAANDAL v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL

  • G.R. No. 144942 June 28, 2001 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. LA SUERTE CIGAR.

  • G.R. No. 146062 June 28, 2001 - SANTIAGO ESLABAN v. CLARITA VDA. DE ONORIO

  • A.M. No. 00 4-166-RTC June 29, 2001 - Re: Report on the Judicial Audit

  • A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC June 29, 2001 - HERNANDO PEREZ, ET AL. v. JOSEPH E. ESTRADA, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-00-1380 June 29, 2001 - GLORIA O. DINO v. FRANCISCO DUMUKMAT

  • G.R. No. 110480 June 29, 2001 - BANGKO SILANGAN DEVELOPMENT BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111860 June 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS CLEDORO

  • G.R. No. 116092 June 29, 2001 - SUSANA VDA. DE COCHINGYAN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118251 June 29, 2001 - METROPOLITAN BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. REGINO T. VERIDIANO II, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121597 June 29, 2001 - PHIL. NATIONAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125944 June 29, 2001 - DANILO SOLANGON, ET AL. v. JOSE AVELINO SALAZAR

  • G.R. No. 126396 June 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. FELIXBERTO LAO-AS

  • G.R. No. 128705 June 29, 2001 - CONRADO AGUILAR v. COMMERCIAL SAVINGS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129782 June 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BALWINDER SINGH, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 131968 June 29, 2001 - ERNESTO PENGSON, ET AL v. MIGUEL OCAMPO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132059 June 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WENEFREDO DIMSON ASOY

  • G.R. No. 138598 June 29, 2001 - ASSET PRIVATIZATION TRUST v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144542 June 29, 2001 - FRANCISCO DELA PEÑA, ET AL v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 133605   June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN BARRIAS

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 133605. June 28, 2001.]

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BENJAMIN BARRIAS, Accused-Appellant.

    D E C I S I O N


    PUNO, J.:


    This is an appeal from the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Naga City convicting accused-appellant of the crime of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and to pay private complainant the sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages, P10,000.00 as attorney’s fees, plus costs. 1

    Accused-appellant Benjamin Barrias was charged before the Regional Trial Court of Naga City with the crime of rape allegedly committed against private complainant Rosalinda Guerrero on April 27, 1995. The Information dated October 31, 1995 alleged:chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    "That on or about April 27, 1995, in the City of Naga, Philippines, and within the Jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force and intimidation with lewd design, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with private complainant, ROSALINDA GUERRERO y ORTIZ, a minor, 15 years old, against her will and without her consent, to her damage and prejudice.

    That as a result thereof, private complainant is now six (6) months pregnant.

    CONTRARY TO LAW." 2

    The prosecution proved the following facts:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    On April 27, 1995, around 9:00 o’clock in the morning, private complainant who was then 15 years of age 3 went to the residence of accused-appellant in Barangay Concepcion Grande, Naga City to buy some indian mangoes which she would in turn sell for profit. She called on the occupants of the house four times before accused-appellant came out through the kitchen door. She told him that she wanted to buy some mangoes. Accused-appellant, armed with a bolo, held her left wrist and dragged her into the house. Private complainant tried to resist by moving her body toward the opposite direction and by holding on to a piece of bamboo by the door. But he prevailed upon her and successfully dragged her to the room near the kitchen. Upon reaching the room, Accused-appellant pushed private complainant. She fell and hit her forehead on the floor, causing her to feel dizzy. Accused-appellant threw the bolo on the table in the kitchen. He then drew a fan knife from his pocket and walked toward private complainant. He warned her not to make any noise, otherwise, he would kill her. With the knife in his left hand, Accused-appellant started undressing private complainant using his right hand. He removed her short pants and underwear. Thereafter, he took off his short pants and briefs. Accused-appellant mounted private complainant and pressed her legs with his knees to prevent her from moving. He poked the knife on her chest, above her left breast. Using his knees, Accused-appellant forcibly spread the legs of private complainant. He then held his penis and inserted it into her vagina. Private complainant felt pain. Accused-appellant made a push and pull movement. She cried because of severe pain. After satisfying his lust, Accused-appellant stood up and wiped his organ with his shirt. Private complainant saw blood and felt pain in her vagina. She, nevertheless, managed to get up and flee. She took her short pants and underwear and ran to a grassy area and there put on her lower garments. Accused-appellant tried to pursue her but he was not able to catch up with her. 4

    Private complainant proceeded to the house of her aunt, Lourdes Nidea, where she was staying. When she reached the house, she went straight to the bathroom to wash herself. She also washed her short pants and underwear which were smeared with blood. Private complainant changed her clothes and went to bed. She slept until 6:00 o’clock in the evening because her body was aching. Private complainant did not tell her aunt about the sexual assault because she was afraid that accused-appellant might carry out his threat to kill her if she reports the incident to her relatives. 5 But accused-appellant’s evil deed could not remain hidden forever. Because of the rape, private complainant became pregnant. In August 1995, Lourdes Nidea noticed that private complainant was getting plump and her abdomen was growing bigger. Lourdes confronted her and asked her if she had a problem. Fearful of accused-appellant’s threat, private complainant replied in the negative. Lourdes brought private complainant to her grandmother, Flora Cortez, and asked the latter to talk to her. Private complainant revealed to her grandmother that accused-appellant had raped her. 6

    Flora accompanied private complainant to the police authorities to report the rape. Then they went to the Naga City Hospital to have private complainant physically examined. 7 Dr. Joel Jurado conducted a physical examination of private complainant on September 6, 1995. He made the following findings:chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    "The following lesions/findings were noted:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    1. Pubic Hairs — Scanty

    2. Hymen — Laceration at 4 o’clock and 5 o’clock position.

    3. Uterine fundus — Two (2) fingers breaths below umbilicus.

    4. Breasts plus fullness.

    5. Last menstrual period — April 1995." 8

    Private complainant filed a complaint against accused-appellant for rape at the Office of the City Prosecutor. 9 After the filing of the complaint, in September 1995, Accused-appellant went to the house of Lourdes Nidea and requested them to withdraw the case against him. He promised to support private complainant, to give them five (5) cavans of palay every harvest, and to make improvements in the house of Flora Cortez. He pledged to give P2,000.00 every month to private complainant. Lourdes informed Flora about the offer of accused-appellant but Flora said that they would not withdraw the case. 10

    Private complainant gave birth to a baby boy named Marvin Cortez Guerrero on January 9, 1996. 11 He, however, died on April 8, 1997 due to acute bronchopneumonia. 12

    The defense denied the charge filed against Accused-Appellant. Accused-appellant testified that in the morning of April 27, 1995, private complainant went to his house to ask for some indian mangoes. He allowed her to pick some mangoes from the trees in his backyard. Private complainant got ten mangoes and placed them in her pocket. Thereafter, she left. Around 3:00 o’clock in the afternoon of the same day, private complainant came to him to borrow P500.00 to be used for their excursion in Pasacao. Accused-appellant did not give her the money at that time but told her to meet with him at the house of his daughter, Eva, where he would hand to her the money. 13 Accused-appellant denied having carnal knowledge of private complainant. 14 He claimed that private complainant might have filed the case against him to evade payment of the debt of her grandmother in the amount of P1,000.00, as well as those of her other relatives. 15

    The trial court gave credence to the evidence of the prosecution and convicted accused-appellant of the crime of rape. The dispositive portion of the Judgment reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "WHEREFORE, the prosecution having proved beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused Benjamin Barrias of the crime of rape of which he is presently charged, judgment is hereby rendered whereby the accused is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; to pay private complainant the sum of FIFTY THOUSAND (P50,000.00) PESOS as moral damages; TEN THOUSAND (P10,000.00) PESOS for attorney’s fees; and to pay the costs.

    SO ORDERED." 16

    Accused-appellant filed a notice of appeal from the Judgment of the trial court. 17 He raised the sole assignment of error in the appeal:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "The court a quo erred in finding accused-appellant guilty of the crime of rape by totally disregarding his evidence, the law and existing jurisprudence." 18

    In his Brief, Accused-appellant cites the four-month delay in the filing of the complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office, and some inconsistencies and alleged improbabilities in the narration of private complainant to discredit her testimony. He contends that it is unnatural for a woman not to make an outcry during the sexual assault to protest the advances of the offender; that it is impossible for a male organ to penetrate the organ of a virgin female without the man using his fingers to guide his organ into the woman’s private part; and that it is unbelievable that private complainant was overpowered by accused-appellant who was only of slight built and height and was already sixty years old at the time of the alleged rape.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    The appeal is without merit.

    Time and again we have ruled that factual findings of the trial court deserve the highest respect absent any showing that the trial judge overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight which would affect the result of the case or that the judge acted arbitrarily. This is based on the fact that the trial judge is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses who appeared before his sala as he had personally heard them and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial. 19 In the case at bar, we perceive no error in the assessment by the trial court of the evidence presented by the parties. The inconsistencies and alleged improbabilities in the testimony of private complainant pointed out by accused-appellant refer only to trivial matters which do not affect the credibility of her testimony. We in fact observe, after a careful study of the records, that private complainant narrated the story of her defilement with clear details. That kind of narration can only be done by someone who has actually undergone such harrowing experience. 20 Furthermore, no improper motive has been ascribed to private complainant to move her to falsely charge accused-appellant with a very serious offense such as rape. It is highly incredible that private complainant would fabricate a tale of defloration and expose herself to public scandal and humiliation only to avoid payment of the P1,000.00 debt of her grandmother and of her other relatives. A grandmother who cares about her grandchild would not allow the latter to go through the trauma of physical examination and trial if it were not true that she has been raped. Moreover, it has been shown that after the filing of the complaint, Accused-appellant approached the aunt of private complainant and pleaded with them to withdraw the case in exchange for some material benefit. Such act amounts to an offer of compromise which may be construed as an implied admission of guilt. 21

    Contrary to the assertion of accused-appellant, the four-month delay in the filing of a formal charge does not diminish the veracity of private complainant’s testimony. We have held that many victims of rape never complain or file criminal charges against the rapist for they prefer to silently bear the ignominy and pain rather than reveal their shame to the world or risk the offender’s ire and drive him to carry out his threats. 22 Private complainant in this case chose to conceal even from her family what accused-appellant had done to her because she was afraid that he might make good his threat to kill her if she tells anybody about the incident. She, however, could not hide her pregnancy which resulted from the rape. Thus, she was compelled to reveal the incident to her grandmother four months later. It was only at that time, with the support of her grandmother, that private complainant gained the courage to seek redress for the violation on her person.

    Hence, we find that the trial court did not err in convicting accused-appellant of the crime of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay moral damages to private complainant. The trial court, however, failed to award civil indemnity to private complainant. The civil indemnity awarded to rape victims is separate and distinct from moral damages. The award of civil indemnity of P50,000.00 is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape. 23

    IN VIEW WHEREOF, the appeal is DISMISSED. The appealed Judgment of the Regional Trial Court of Naga City is hereby AFFIRMED. Accused-appellant is further ordered to pay private complainant the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) as CIVIL INDEMNITY in addition to the moral damages awarded by the trial court.

    SO ORDERED.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    Davide, Jr., C.J., Kapunan and Pardo, JJ., concur.

    Ynares-Santiago, J., on official business.

    Endnotes:



    1. Judgment dated March 4, 1998 penned by Judge Antonio N. Gerona, Rollo, pp. 22-35.

    2. Rollo, p. 9.

    3. The birth certificate of private complainant shows that she was born on November 19, 1979 (Exhibit "A").

    4. Testimony of Rosalinda Guerrero, TSN, December 12, 1997, pp. 6-19.

    5. Id., pp. 19-20.

    6. Id., pp. 20-21; Testimony of Lourdes Nidea, TSN, January 13, 1998, pp. 5-8.

    7. Testimony of Rosalinda Guerrero, TSN, December 12, 1997, p. 22.

    8. Exhibit "B" .

    9. Testimony of Rosalinda Guerrero, TSN, December 12, 1997, p. 23.

    10. Testimony of Lourdes Nidea, TSN, January 13, 1998, pp. 8-9.

    11. Exhibit "C" .

    12. Exhibit "D" .

    13. Testimony of Benjamin Barrias, TSN, January 30, 1998, pp. 21-26.

    14. Id., p. 28.

    15. Id., pp. 37-39.

    16. Rollo, p. 35.

    17. Rollo, p. 36.

    18. Appellant’s Brief, Rollo, p. 84.

    19. People v. Abangin, 297 SCRA 655 (1998).

    20. People v. Dimapilis, 300 SCRA 279 (1998).

    21. Section 27, Rule 130, Revised Rules of Court.

    22. People v. Geromo, 321 SCRA 355 (1999).

    23. People v. Barcelona, 325 SCRA 168 (2000); People v. Bato, 325 SCRA 671 (2000).

    G.R. No. 133605   June 28, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN BARRIAS


    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