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. 111860   June 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS CLEDORO

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 111860. June 29, 2001.]

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JESUS CLEDORO, JR., Respondent.

    D E C I S I O N


    PARDO, J.:


    As the court of last resort, we are laden with a heavy task — to determinate whether accused shall suffer the highest prison term imposable under the law. 1 Given no chance to observe the demeanor and deportment of the witnesses and the parties involved, we rely on the expressionless and impersonal records and on the trial court’s careful assessment, bearing in mind that proof beyond reasonable doubt requires a moral certainty of guilt. 2 All things considered, we reject the appeal.cralaw : red

    The Case


    This case was appealed from the decision 3 of the Regional Trial Court of Cavite, Branch 13, Tagaytay City, to the Court of Appeals. 4 The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court finding accused Jesus Cledoro, Jr. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape but modified the sentence by imposing upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua. However, the Court of Appeals refrained from entering judgment and certified the case to the Supreme Court for review. 5

    The Antecedents


    On July 19, 1989, assistant provincial prosecutor Reynaldo L. Gervacio of Cavite filed with the Regional Trial Court, Cavite, an information for rape against accused Jesus Cledoro, Jr., to wit: 6

    "That on or about 12:00 o’clock noon of March 14, 1989, at Barangay Lumil, Municipality of Silang, Province of Cavite, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd designs and by means of force and violence did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the private complainant, Agrifina J. Espiritu, a minor fourteen (14) years of age, against her will.

    "CONTRARY TO LAW."cralaw virtua1aw library

    On September 20, 1989, the trial court arraigned the accused. He pleaded "not guilty." 7

    On January 23, 1990, the trial court rendered a decision, the dispositive portion of which reads: 8

    "WHEREFORE, considering all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered, finding accused JESUS CLEDORO, JR., GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime of RAPE committed against AGRIFINA J. ESPIRITU, as defined and penalized under Art. 335 (par. 1) of the Revised Penal Code and hereby sentences him to suffer a penalty ranging from:chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    TWELVE (12) YEARS and ONE (1) DAY

    - to -

    TWENTY (20) YEARS

    "there being no aggravating nor mitigating circumstances sufficient to alter the structure of the penalty provided for by law, as amended by Section 1, Republic Act 4111.

    "In addition, Accused is hereby ordered to pay his victim, AGRIFINA J. ESPIRITU, the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "(1) The sum of P50,000.00 — as and for moral damages;

    "(2) The sum of P30,000.00 — as and for exemplary damages;

    "(3) The sum of P10,000.00 — as and for actual damages and to pay the costs of suit.

    "SO ORDERED."cralaw virtua1aw library

    In time, Accused appealed to the Court of Appeals. 9

    On September 28, 1993, the Court of Appeals promulgated its decision, decreeing thus: 10

    "WHEREFORE, the Decision of the trial court dated January 23, 1990, finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, being in all respects in accordance with law and the evidence should be, as it is hereby AFFIRMED with the sole modification that the appellant shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. In accordance with Section 13, Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, we hereby refrain from entering the judgment and forthwith certify the case and elevate the entire record thereof to the Supreme Court for review. With costs.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    "SO ORDERED."cralaw virtua1aw library

    As aforesaid, the Court of Appeals certified the case to this Court for final determination. 11

    The Facts


    The procedural antecedents surrounding the filing of the rape charge find its roots in a story narrated by complaining witness Agrifina J. Espiritu (hereafter, "Agrifina"). The accused was her suitor. On March 14, 1989, at around noontime, she was on her way home when accused accosted her, poked a knife at her, held her at the waist and forcibly brought her to a nearby nipa hut where he succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her twice. 12

    On the other hand, Accused weaves a tale of love and romance, claiming that Agrifina was his lover and that they consummated their love not just once but eight times. 13 Accused-appellant claims that it was Agrifina who brought him to the nipa hut to voluntarily have sexual intercourse. 14

    Accused decries the accusation against him as an act of hatred of Agrifina’s parents who have always disliked him. 15

    Someone is lying. The trial court had the duty to determine who it was and pass down the verdict. It found in favor of the prosecution, a finding likewise supported by the Court of Appeals. Hence, this appeal.

    The Court’s Ruling


    The well-written decision of the trial court, supported by the records and resting on eloquent logic, coupled with the dearth of evidence in favor of accused-appellant prompts us to affirm a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    Accused insists he and complaining witness were sweethearts. However, except for his assertion, he did not offer any proof to sustain this claim. He did not present other witnesses to attest to this alleged fact. He did not present any love letters or gifts. Profession of love is not enough; acceptance of the proffer must be proved to show a sweetheart relationship. Allegations are not proof. There must be corroborative evidence. 16

    There is no better test to measure the value of a witness testimony than its conformity to the knowledge and common experience of mankind. 17 In People v. Antonio, 18 we held that the testimony of a fourteen-year old rape victim impressed as it is with youth and immaturity, bears the badges of truth and sincerity. A fourteen-year old rape victim comes forward, allows the examination of her private parts and undergoes a public trial because of a desire to have the culprit apprehended and punished. 19chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    The well-entrenched rule is that the assessment of the trial court on credibility of witnesses is entitled to respect. It is the trial court that had the opportunity to observe the witnesses’ manner of testifying, their furtive glances, calmness, sighs or their scant or full realization of their oaths. 20

    More compelling are the findings of the medico-legal expert that buttresses the assertion that force was employed on the young Agrifina. Dr. Engracia dela Cruz submitted a medico-legal report which showed that Agrifina suffered the following injuries: 21

    (a) Abrasion, right knee

    (b) Abrasion, right leg, anterior

    (c) Abrasion, left leg, anterior

    (d) Labia minora, not captated

    (e) Labia minora, 12:00 abrasion

    According to Dr. Engracia dela Cruz, the injuries were sustained about four to five days before, the physical examination on March 20, 1989. 22 To our mind, this sufficiently buttresses Agrifina’s accusation that sexual contact with accused was not consensual and that he employed force.

    Accused cites inconsistencies in the testimony of Agrifina. These inconsistencies, he insists, discredit her. We are not persuaded. The substance of Agrifina’s testimony is that accused force sexual contact with her. On this matter, she did not waiver. Any inconsistency in Agrifina’s testimony is insignificant. The rule is that for a discrepancy in a testimony to acquit, such must refer to crucial facts significant to the guilt or innocence of the accused. Inconsistencies irrelevant to the elements of the crime are not grounds to reverse the conviction. 23

    The Court of Appeals imposed the correct penalty. Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, the crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua, in the absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances.

    An award of civil indemnity ex-delicto in favor of the offended party in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) is mandatory upon a finding of rape. 24 Likewise, moral damages in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) must be awarded without need of proof of mental and physical suffering.25cralaw:red

    We delete the award of exemplary damages.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    We also delete the award of actual damages. They are not proved by competent evidence. The rule is that every pecuniary loss must be established by credible evidence before it may be awarded. 26

    The Fallo

    WHEREFORE, the decision of the trial court is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Accused-appellant Jesus Cledoro, Jr. is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape, defined and penalized under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, and in the absence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances, is sentenced to reclusion perpetua, with all its accessory penalties. Accused-appellant is further ordered to pay complainant Agrifina J. Espiritu, civil damages ex-delicto in the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) and moral damages of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00). The awards of exemplary and actual damages are DELETED.

    Costs against accused-appellant

    SO ORDERED.

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

    Ynares-Santiago, J., on official business abroad.

    Endnotes:



    1. Reclusion perpetua.

    2. Manuel Huang Chua v. People, G. R No. 128095, January 19, 2001.

    3. In Crim. Case No. TG-1483-89, dated January 23, 1990, Judge Julieto P. Tabiolo, presiding.

    4. In CA-G. R. CR No. 08364, promulgated on September 28, 1993, Alfredo J. Lagamon, J., ponente, Arturo B. Buena (now an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court) and Artemon D. Luna, JJ., concurring.

    5. In accordance with Rule 124, Sec. 13, 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended.

    6. CA Rollo, p. 5.

    7. Embodied in RTC Decision, CA Rollo, p. 6.

    8. RTC Decision, CA Rollo, pp. 1-8, at p. 8.

    9. Docketed as CA-G.R. CR No. 08364.

    10. CA Decision, pp. 1-10, at p. 10.

    11. Rollo, p. 2.

    12. CA Rollo, Decision of the Regional Trial Court, pp. 1-8, at pp. 1-2.

    13. Letter to Division Clerk of Court Virginia Ancheta Soriano, Rollo, p. 7.

    14. CA Rollo, Decision of the Regional Trial Court, pp. 1-8, at p. 6.

    15. Ibid., p. 3.

    16. Manuel Huang Chua v. People, supra, Note 2.

    17. People v. Cabiles, G. R No. 125005, October 3, 2000.

    18. G. R. No. 128149, July 24, 2000.

    19. Citing People v. Juntilla, 314 SCRA 568 [1999]. People v. Lomerio, G. R. No. 129074, February 28, 2000.

    20. People v. Gonzales, G. R. No. 138402, August 18, 2000.

    21. CA Rollo, Decision of the Regional Trial Court, pp. 1-8, at p. 2.

    22. Ibid.

    23. People v. Sanoba, G. R. Nos. 131818-19, February 3, 2000; People v. Bato, G. R No. 134939, February 16, 2000.

    24. People v. Mendiona, G. R. No. 129056, February 21, 2000.

    25. People v. Mangila, G.R. Nos. 130203-04, February 15, 2000; People v. Omar, G. R. No. 120656, March 3, 2000; People v. Alicante, G. R Nos. 127026-27, May 31, 2000.

    26. People v. Enguito, G. R No. 128812, February 28, 2000, People v. Mindanao, G. R. No. 123095, July 6, 2000.

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


    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