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
 

   
November-2001 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 137968 November 6, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRE DELOS SANTOS

  • G.R. Nos. 123138-39 November 8, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. HONESTO LLANDELAR

  • A.M. MTJ-01-1375 November 13, 2001 - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT IN THE MTCs of CALASIAO. BINMALEY

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1601 November 13, 2001 - ELIEZER A. SIBAYAN-JOAQUIN v. ROBERTO S. JAVELLANA

  • G.R. No. 104629 November 13, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JULIUS KINOK

  • G.R. No. 134498 November 13, 2001 - CELIA M. MERIZ v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL

  • G.R. Nos. 135454-56 November 13, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. RODERICK SANTOS

  • A.M. No. CA-01-10-P November 14, 2001 - ALDA C. FLORIA v. CURIE F. SUNGA, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-01-1518 November 14, 2001 - ANTONIO A. ARROYO v. SANCHO L. ALCANTARA

  • G.R. No. 122736 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FROILAN PADILLA

  • G.R. No. 123819 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. STEPHEN MARK WHISENHUNT

  • G.R. No. 133877 November 14, 2001 - RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION v. ALFA RTW MANUFACTURING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 133910 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOSE VIRREY y DEHITO

  • G.R. No. 135511-13 November 14, 2001 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ENTICO MARIANO y EXCONDE

  • G.R. No. 137613 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSALITO CABOQUIN

  • G.R. No. 138914 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN MANTES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142870 November 14, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DINDO F. PAJOTAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 143513 & 143590 November 14, 2001 - POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES v. COURT OF APPEALS and FIRESTONE CERAMICS

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1599 November 15, 2001 - TRANQUILINO F. MERIS v. JUDGE FLORENTINO M. ALUMBRES

  • G.R. No. 123213 November 15, 2001 - NEPOMUCENA BRUTAS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126584 November 15, 2001 - VALLEY LAND RESOURCES, INC., ET AL. v. VALLEY GOLF CLUB INC.

  • G.R. No. 127897 November 15, 2001 - DELSAN TRANSPORT LINES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129018 November 15, 2001 - CARMELITA LEAÑO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136017 November 15, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JERRY BANTILING

  • G.R. No. 136143 November 15, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. AGAPITO CABOTE a.k.a. "PITO"

  • G.R. No. 137255 November 15, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOEL MAMALAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137369 November 15, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ALIAS KOBEN VISTA

  • G.R. No. 141811 November 15, 2001 - FIRST METRO INVESTMENT CORPORATION v. ESTE DEL SOL MOUNTAIN RESERVE

  • G.R. No. 145275 November 15, 2001 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. LA CAMPANA FABRICA DE TABACOS

  • G.R. No. 148326 November 15, 2001 - PABLO C. VILLABER Petitioner v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS and REP. DOUGLAS R. CAGAS

  • A.M. No. MTJ-01-1382 November 16, 2001 - MARIO W. CHILAGAN v. EMELINA L. CATTILING

  • A.M. No. P-00-1411 November 16, 2001 - FELICIDAD JACOB v. JUDITH T. TAMBO

  • G.R. No. 120274 November 16, 2001 - SPOUSES FRANCISCO A. PADILLA and GERALDINE S. PADILLA v. COURT OF APPEALS and SPOUSES CLAUDIO AÑONUEVO and CARMELITA AÑONUEVO

  • G.R. No. 127003 November 16, 2001 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. FAUSTINO GABON

  • G.R. Nos. 132875-76 November 16, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO G. JALOSJOS

  • G.R. No. 132916 November 16, 2001 - RUFINA TANCINCO v. GSIS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 133437 November 16, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. RONALD SAMSON

  • G.R. No. 134486 November 16, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CLEMENTE DAYNA

  • G.R. No. 135038 November 16, 2001 - ROLANDO Y. TAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142654 November 16, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. ROLANDO MENDOZA

  • G.R. No. 143802 November 16, 2001 - REYNOLAN T. SALES v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129175 November 19, 2001 - RUBEN N. BARRAMEDA, ET AL. v. ROMEO ATIENZA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130945 November 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO CONDINO

  • G.R. No. 132724 November 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. RENIEL SANAHON

  • G.R. Nos. 138358-59 November 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CLAUDIO B. DELA PEÑA

  • G.R. No. 138661 November 19, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JERSON E. ACOJEDO

  • G.R. No. 140920 November 19, 2001 - JUAN LORENZO B. BORDALLO, ET AL. v. THE PROFESSIONAL REGULATIONS COMMISSION AND THE BOARD OF MARINE DECK OFFICERS

  • G.R. No. 148560 November 19, 2001 - JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA v. SANDIGANBAYAN (Third Division) and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 91486 November 20, 2001 - ALBERTO G. PINLAC v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122276 November 20, 2001 - RODRIGO ALMUETE ET AL., v. MARCELO ANDRES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126204 November 20, 2001 - NAPOCOR v. PHILIPP BROTHERS OCEANIC

  • G.R. Nos. 126538-39 November 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. RODELIO MARCELO

  • G.R. No. 129234 November 20, 2001 - THERMPHIL v. COURT OF APPEALS ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140032 November 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ANGEL C. BALDOZ and MARY GRACE NEBRE

  • G.R. No. 140692 November 20, 2001 - ROGELIO C. DAYAN v. BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144401 November 20, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOEL GALISIM

  • A.M. No. MTJ-99-1207 November 21, 2001 - NBI v. FRANCISCO D. VILLANUEVA

  • A.M. No. P- 01-1520 November 21, 2001 - MARILOU A. CABANATAN v. CRISOSTOMO T. MOLINA

  • A.M. Nos. RTJ-00-1561 & RTJ-01-1659 November 21, 2001 - CARINA AGARAO v. Judge JOSE J. PARENTELA

  • G.R. No. 125356 November 21, 2001 - SUPREME TRANSLINER INC. v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 132839 November 21, 2001 - ERIC C. ONG v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS and THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 133879 November 21, 2001 - EQUATORIAL REALTY DEVELOPMENT v. MAYFAIR THEATER

  • G.R. No. 136748 November 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137457 November 21, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSAURO SIA

  • G.R. No. 141881 November 21, 2001 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. VIRGILIO BERNABE y RAFOL

  • A.M. No RTJ-01-1664 November 22, 2001 - ALFREDO CAÑADA v. VICTORINO MONTECILLO

  • G.R. No. 109648 November 22, 2001 - PH CREDIT CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS and CARLOS M. FARRALES

  • G.R. Nos. 111502-04 November 22, 2001 - REYNALDO H. JAYLO, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 113218 November 22, 2001 - ALEJANDRO TECSON v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113541 November 22, 2001 - HONGKONG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. EMPLOYEES UNION v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118462 November 22, 2001 - LEOPOLDO GARRIDO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123893 November 22, 2001 - LUISITO PADILLA , ET AL. v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129660 November 22, 2001 - BIENVENIDO P. JABAN and LYDIA B. JABAN v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130628 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PAULINO LEONAR

  • G.R. No. 132743 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCIAL CAÑARES Y ORBES

  • G.R. No. 133861 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO SO

  • G.R. Nos. 135853-54 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. OPENIANO LACISTE

  • G.R. No. 135863 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VlRGILIO LORICA

  • G.R. Nos. 136317-18 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO YAOTO

  • G.R. No. 136586 November 22, 2001 - JON AND MARISSA DE YSASI v. ARTURO AND ESTELA ARCEO

  • G.R. No. 139563 November 22, 2001 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.. v. AMADOR BISMONTE y BERINGUELA

  • G.R. Nos. 139959-60 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEOGRACIAS BURGOS

  • G.R. No. 141602 November 22, 2001 - PACSPORTS PHILS. v. NICCOLO SPORTS, INC.

  • G.R. No. 142316 November 22, 2001 - FRANCISCO A.G. DE LIANO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143939 November 22, 2001 - HEIRS OF ROSARIO POSADAS REALTY v. ROSENDO.BANTUG

  • G.R. No. 145475 November 22, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EUSEBIO PUNSALAN

  • G.R. No. 145851 November 22, 2001 - ABELARDO B. LICAROS v. THE SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 146683 November 22, 2001 - CIRILA ARCABA v. ERLINDA TABANCURA VDA. DE BATOCAEL, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1562 November 23, 2001 - CAVITE CRUSADE FOR GOOD GOVERNMENT v. JUDGE NOVATO CAJIGAL

  • G.R. No. 126334 November 23, 2001 - EMILIO EMNACE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128886 November 23, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS JULIANDA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142044 November 23, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TOBECHUKWU NICHOLAS

  • G.R. No. 144309 November 23, 2001 - SOLID TRIANGLE SALES CORPORATION and ROBERT SITCHON v. THE SHERIFF OF RTC QC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1662 November 26, 2001 - VICTOR TUZON v. LORETO CLORIBEL-PURUGGANAN

  • G.R. No. 138303 November 26, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELROSWELL MANZANO

  • G.R. Nos. 100940-41 November 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. AGUSTIN LADAO y LORETO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 128285 November 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. ANTONIO PLANA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 130409-10 November 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSUE B. DUMLAO

  • G.R. No. 130907 November 27, 2001 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. HON. CESAR A MANGROBANG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130963 November 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIANO PASCUA

  • G.R. No. 133381 November 27, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMULO VILLAVER, ET. AL.

  • G.R. No. 140858 November 27, 2001 - SPOUSES PAPA and LOLITA MANALILI v. SPOUSES ARSENIO and GLICERIA DE LEON

  • G.R. No. 142523 November 27, 2001 - MARIANO L. GUMABON, ET AL. v. AQUILINO T. LARIN

  • G.R. No. 144464 November 27, 2001 - GILDA G. CRUZ and ZENAIDA C. PAITIM v. THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • A.M. No. 00-8-05-SC November 28, 2001 - RE: PROBLEM OF DELAYS IN CASES BEFORE THE SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. 128516 November 28, 2001 - DULOS REALTY and DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET. AL.

  • A.M. No. P-01-1485 November 29, 2001 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. MARIE YVETTE GO, ET AL

  • A.M. No. P-01-1522 November 29, 2001 - JUDGE ANTONIO J. FINEZA v. ROMEO P. ARUELO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1665 November 29, 2001 - ROSAURO M. MIRANDA v. JUDGE CESAR A MANGROBANG

  • G.R. No. 119707 November 29, 2001 - VERONICA PADILLO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. 121703 November 29, 2001 - NATIVIDAD T. TANGALIN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126524 November 29, 2001 - BPI INVESTMENT CORP. v. D.G. CARREON COMMERCIAL CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129282 November 29, 2001 - DMPI EMPLOYEES CREDIT COOPERATIVE v. ALEJANDRO M. VELEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 129609 & 135537 November 29, 2001 - RODIL ENTERPRISES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 130326 & 137868 November 29, 2001 - COMPANIA GENERAL DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS AND MANILA TOBACCO TRADING v. THE COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. Nos. 132066-67 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BALAS MEDIOS

  • G.R. No. 132133 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. WILLIAM ALPE y CUATRO

  • G.R. No. 136848 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENATO T. RAMIREZ

  • G.R. No. 137815 November 29, 2001 - JUANITA T. SERING v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138489 November 29, 2001 - ELEANOR DELA CRUZ, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • G.R. No. 139470 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SPO2 ANTONIO B. BENOZA

  • G.R. No. 140386 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENNY ACOSTA

  • G.R. No. 141386 November 29, 2001 - COMMISSION ON AUDIT OF THE PROVINCE OF CEBU v. PROVINCE OF CEBU

  • G.R. Nos. 141702-03 November 29, 2001 - CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS v. NLRC and MARTHA Z. SINGSON

  • G.R. No. 142606 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NESTOR MUNTA

  • G.R. No. 143127 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL RUBARES Y CAROLINO

  • G.R. No. 143703 November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. JOSE V. MUSA

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 132133   November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. WILLIAM ALPE y CUATRO

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. 132133. November 29, 2001.]

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. WILLIAM ALPE y CUATRO, Appellant.

    D E C I S I O N


    PER CURIAM: p:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    This is an automatic review of the December 8, 1997 judgment rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Naga City, Branch 28, in Criminal Case No. RTC’95-6000 convicting WILLIAM ALPE y CUATRO of qualified rape of his daughter, Mary Joy Alpe. The decretal portion of said Decision reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing findings that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of accused William Alpe beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, judgment is hereby rendered whereby said accused is sentenced to suffer the penalty of death and to pay the private complainant moral damages in the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND (P50,000.00) PESOS. With costs against the accused." 1

    The accusatory Information 2 against appellant reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "That sometime in the month of January, 1995, in the Municipality of Gainza, Province of Camarines Sur, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of violence and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of his daughter Mary Joy Alpe y San Juan, then 14 years of age, against her will."cralaw virtua1aw library

    When arraigned on July 8, 1997, appellant, with the assistance of counsel pleaded "not guilty." 3 In due course, appellant was tried and found guilty of qualified rape.chanrob1es virtua1 law library

    The Solicitor General summarized the evidence for the prosecution thusly: 4

    "Appellant William Alpe and his wife, Virginia Alpe, and their four (4) children, namely, private complainant Mary Joy, the eldest, who was 14 years old at that time, and her younger siblings, Michael, Lorena and William, Jr., reside at their one-room affair house at Barangay Namuat, Gainza, Camarines Sur.

    "Sometime in January 1995, around 3:00 o’clock in the morning, the Alpes were asleep at their house, with the spouses on one mat, and their four (4) children on another mat.

    "Suddenly, private complainant Mary Joy was awakened when she felt that appellant was beside her, removing her clothes, and caressing her breast and private parts. Appellant, who was only wearing a T-shirt and was naked from the waist down, then placed himself on top of her and inserted his penis into her vagina, and did a push and pull movement. She experienced extreme pain and described that it felt like she was dying when he inserted his penis into her sexual organ. She tried to extricate herself from appellant but she failed. Appellant warned her not to tell anybody, not even her mother, Otherwise he would kill her and the other members of the family. She managed to call her mother who was just about an arm length away and shouted ‘mother, my father is beside me.’ Mary Joy’s shout jolted her mother, Virginia, from her sleep. The latter rose up slowly as her knees trembled upon seeing that her husband was lying on top of their daughter, Mary Joy. She clearly saw them as the room was illuminated by the small lamp that was kept lighted throughout the night. Then she pulled appellant away from Mary Joy. Upon doing that, appellant pushed her towards the floor causing her to land on her back. Then appellant got hold of a piece of wood and struck her with it, twice. Then they [quarreled] and argued with each other. When she asked appellant if he had been sexually abusing their daughter, he replied that he was only showing affection. When she asked Mary Joy if her father had previously abused her, she did not reply but just went on crying. Her younger siblings, who were frightened by what they saw, also cried.

    "It was on April 29, 1995 that Mary joy revealed to her mother that appellant had previously raped her on three (3) other occasions, once in the month of May, 1993, and twice in the month of June, 1993, all at the time when her mother was in Biñan. Before she made the revelation, two (2) days before or on April 27, 1995, appellant had mauled her mother, which incident was the subject of another criminal case against appellant for which he had already been convicted. Mary Joy explained that the reason she did not immediately report those rape incidents to anybody, not even to her mother, was because she was afraid of appellant’s threat that he would kill her and the other members of the family. She, however, later felt impelled to make the revelation because aside from the fact that she could no longer stand appellant’s too frequent physical assault on her mother, she too could no longer bear appellant’s sexual abuses, and she became afraid that he would also sexually abuse her younger sister, Lorena.

    "Because of what Mary Joy revealed to her, Virginia Alpe decided to accompany her daughter to the police station and filed several complaints for rape against appellant. The other rape incidents which took place in 1993 became the subject of other rape cases against appellant, in addition to the one at bar. Consequently, Virginia and her four (4) children transferred residence to Barangay Cagbunga, Gainza, Camarines Sur.

    "Upon the suggestion of the police authorities, Mary Joy was subjected to physical and internal examination by Dr. Elizabeth Fernandez on May 1, 1995.

    "The following are the pertinent results of the examination by Dr. Fernandez:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Physical Findings: Internal Examination admits easily 1 finger, presence of a healed hymenal laceration at 9:00 o’clock.

    The above described injury is found in the body of the subject, the age of which is compatible [with] the alleged date of Infl[i]ction.

    "Dr. Fernandez testified that just because only one laceration was found does not necessarily mean that there was only one infliction because the extent of the laceration depends much on the elasticity of the hymen. She further cited that there are even some cases wherein despite having delivered a baby, the hymen of a woman had remained intact, indicating that it was because of the extremely elastic nature of the hymen of that particular woman." (Citations omitted)

    On the other hand, appellant merely "denied having raped her daughter MARY JOY ALPE, and stated that had he raped her, she ‘would have suffered multiple laceration because there are bolitas embedded in my organ. . . implanted one on one side of my organ and the other one is under my penis so that if it will be used in sexual intercourse that bolitas would cause damage to the female organ." ‘ 5

    The court a quo disregarded appellant’s denial and contentions. Instead, it gave full credence to the testimonies of both Virginia Alpe and Mary Joy Alpe that appellant had carnal knowledge of the latter, against her will one early morning in January 1995.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    The court a quo also found that, as evidenced by her birth certificate, Mary Joy was just 14 years old when the accused raped her.

    In his Appellant’s Brief, 6 appellant faults the court a quo with the following alleged errors:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    I


    "The court a quo erred in finding the accused-appellant guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.

    II


    "The court a quo erred in ordering the accused-appellant to pay private complainant moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00"

    More specifically, appellant contends that the delay in reporting the alleged rape and the presence of bolitas in his penis in conjunction with the proof of only a single laceration in Mary Joy’s hymen create reasonable doubt about his guilt.

    We are not persuaded. Well-settled is the rule that delay in reporting the offense of incestuous rape is not an indication that the charge is fabricated. Neither does it cast doubt on the credibility of the complainant, as it is not uncommon for young girls to conceal for sometime the assault on their virtue because of the rapist’s threat on their lives. 7 In this case, appellant consistently intimidated Mary Joy by threatening to kill her and the other members of the family if she revealed the rape committed against her. She satisfactorily explained 8 that she did not immediately report the rape incidents, because she was afraid of the threats made by appellant. "Delay in reporting a rape incident neither diminishes complainant’s credibility nor undermines the charges of rape where the delay can be attributed to the pattern of fear instilled by the threats of bodily harm, specially by one who exercised moral ascendancy over the victim." 9

    The existence of bolitas in appellant’s penis also fails to raise any reasonable doubt that he raped Mary Joy. Appellant opines that the presence of bolitas in a man’s penis will result in multiple lacerations in a virgin’s hymen. Other than his opinion, there is, however, no evidence proving its truth. Significantly, he has not been shown to be in possession of special knowledge or experience on the subject matter. 10 Hence, his opinion on the number of lacerations a penis with bolitas would cause has no probative value. Thus, his claim that he could not have had carnal knowledge of Mary Joy, since she had only one hymenal laceration, cannot be given weight.

    On the other hand, the claim of Mary Joy that appellant had carnal knowledge of her against her is supported not only by her clear and convincing testimony but also by that of her mother. After carefully going over the records of this case, we find no cogent reason to disturb the finding of the trial court upholding the credibility of both.

    Virginia Alpe testified:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "A It was one night while our family was sleeping when I heard Mary Joy shouting, ma’am.

    Q What was she shouting?

    A She shouted ‘Mother, my father is beside me’, ma’am.

    Q When did this happen?

    A Last January, 1995, ma’am.

    Q Where?

    A In Barangay Namuat, ma’am.

    Q More or less what time?

    A Around 3:00 o’clock in the early morning, ma’am.

    Q So when you heard your daughter shouting, what did you do?

    A After I was awakened I was surprised with what I saw because I saw William Alpe Lying on top of our daughter Mary Joy Alpe, ma’am.

    Q And what was William Alpe doing on top of Mary Joy Alpe?

    A He was having a sex with our daughter, ma’am.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    May we put on record that the witness is now crying. May we further state that as per the testimony of the witness, the accused is doing a push and pull movement and [saying] I saw him making a push and pull movement on top of our daughter.

    Q What was your daughter doing when you saw them?

    A She was resisting her father and she was crying and fleeing to her father, ma’am.

    Q What were they wearing, if any, when you saw them?

    A The two (2) of them were naked, ma’am.

    Q And so when you saw them how far where you from them?

    A Around one (1) arm length, ma’am.

    Q And what enable you to see them?

    A I saw them because we have no room in the house, ma’am.

    Q Can you tell this Honorable Court whether or not there was an illumination at that time?

    ATTY. OCAMPO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Objection Your Honor, leading.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Whether or not Your Honor please is not leading.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Yes, its a choice in other words, alright question from the court.

    Q How were you able to see them when it was 3:00 o’clock in the morning?

    A We have a small lamp that was lighted throughout the night, sir.’’ 11 ‘

    On the other hand, Mary Joy testified as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q So we bring you now to the incident that took place in January 1995. What time did it happen?

    A 3:00 o’clock in the early morning, sir.

    Q Do you recall the exact date in January when this incident took place?

    A I cannot remember the date, ma’am.

    Q Can you tell us how it happened?

    A Yes, ma’am.

    Q How did it happen?

    A We were sleeping at that time, ma’am.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q What time did you sleep that night?

    A About 10:00 o’clock in the evening, sir.

    Q You mentioned about we, who were with you at that time you were sleeping?

    A My mother, my two (2) brothers and my other sister sir and I.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Proceed.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q How about the accused where was he at that time you were sleeping?

    A He was beside my mother, ma’am.

    Q Can you tell this Honorable Court whether or not you sleep in the same room?

    A We have no room in our house, ma’am. My father and my mother sleep on the same mat while I and my brothers and sister were sleeping on another mat.

    Q And so what happened?

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Before that,

    Q Does the court understand from you that you can just see in one room?

    A Yes, sir.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    All right, proceed.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q And so what happened?

    A While I was then sleeping I was awakened when the accused was already beside me and caressing my breast and my private part.

    Q How did you know that it was the accused who was caressing you?

    A I was awakened, ma’am.

    Q Can you tell this Honorable Court whether or not you saw him?

    A Yes, ma’am I saw Him.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q How were you able to see him when according to you it happened at 3:00 o’clock in the morning?

    A We have a lamp inside our house that is lighted sir.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Proceed.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q What else did the accused do if any?

    A He placed himself on top of me and inserted his penis into my vagina and I kept shouting to my mother telling her that my father is on top of me.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    For the record, may we manifest that the private complainant is crying.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Alright, proceed.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q What did the accused do on top of you?

    A He kept on pushing and pulling his penis into my vagina, ma’am.

    Q And how long did he stay on top of you?

    A Several minutes only ma’am.

    Q And then what did you do when he was doing this?

    A I tried to extricate myself and at the same time I shouted to my mother, ma’am.

    Q What did you feel when he was doing this to you?

    A When he placed his penis into my vagina I felt I am dying because of pain, ma’am.

    Q What happened after that?

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Before that,

    Q When you noticed that your father placed himself on top of you, do you remember whether he was wearing anything?

    A He was naked all over, sir.

    Q You mean completely naked?

    A He was wearing T-shirt but he has no more underwear, sir.

    Q How about you?

    A When he came beside me he removed my clothes that is why I was awakened, sir.

    Q Were you awakened already when he was removing your clothes or you were awakened when he was just beside you?

    A I was awakened when he was already removing my clothes, sir.

    COURT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Alright, proceed from there.

    PROS. TURIANO:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    Q Can you tell this Honorable Court whether or not the accused said anything while he was doing this to you?

    A He told me not to report this matter to anybody even to my mother because if I do that he would kill us, ma’am.

    Q Now, what happened after that?

    A When my mother was awakened [s]he pulled my father away from me, ma’am.

    Q And what happened next?

    A And then my mother kept on asking my father if he was always doing that to me, ma’am.

    Q And what did your father say?

    A My father told my mother that he was only showing me his affection, ma’am.

    Q And after that what happened next?

    A After that my mother and my father had a quarrel, ma’am.

    Q What happened during the quarrel?

    x       x       x


    A During the quarrel my father pushed my mother down to the floor, ma’am and my father got a piece of wood and struck my mother.

    Q Do you know how many times your father struck your mother with that piece of wood?

    A Several times, ma’am. 12

    The above narration erases all reasonable doubt that appellant raped Mary Joy.

    Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 7659, which is the governing law in this case, states that the death penalty shall be imposed if the crime of rape is attended by any of the following circumstances:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim;"

    In this case, the Information properly alleges that appellant is the father of the victim, Mary Joy Alpe, and that the latter was only 14 years old when the rape was committed. To prove these allegations, the prosecution offered in evidence the Birth Certificate 13 issued by the Civil Registrar of Naga City stating Mary Joy’s date of birth as August 19, 1980 and the name of her father as "Alpe, William C." It also offered the testimony of Virginia Alpe, who stated that she is Mary Joy’s mother, that Mary Joy was around fifteen when the incident in question happened, and that appellant is her husband and Mary Joy’s father. Clearly, the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the circumstances of minority and relationship.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    Four members of the Court maintain their position that RA 7659, insofar as it prescribes the death penalty, is unconstitutional; however, they submit to the ruling of the Court, by majority vote, that the law is constitutional and the death penalty should accordingly be imposed.

    Anent the issue of damages, the trial court correctly awarded P50,000 as moral damages. As explained in People v. Catubig, 14 such award "rests on the jural foundation that the crime of rape necessarily brings with it shame, mental anguish, besmirched reputation, moral shock and social humiliation to the offended party." In addition, P75,000 as civil indemnity ex delicto and exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000 are also awarded to the offended party, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence.

    WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Naga City Branch 28, in Criminal Case No. RTC’95-6000 finding appellant William Alpe y Cuatro guilty of the crime of qualified rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of death and to pay the costs, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that appellant shall pay Mary Joy Alpe in the amount of P75,000 as civil indemnity ex delicto and P25,000 as exemplary damages, in addition to the P50,000 moral damages awarded by the trial court.

    In accordance with Section 25 of Republic Act No. 7659, amending Section 83 of the Revised Penal Code, upon finality of this Decision, let the records of this case be forthwith forwarded to the Office of the President for possible exercise of pardoning power.

    SO ORDERED.

    Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Pardo, Buena, Ynares-Santiago, de Leon, Jr., Sandoval-Gutierrez and Carpio, JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    1. Assailed Decision, p. 10; rollo, p. 26; records, p. 82.

    2. Records, p. 1.

    3. Footnote text not supplied in the original.

    4. Appellee’s Brief, pp. 4-8; rollo, pp. 73-77.

    5. Appellant’s Brief, p. 3; rollo, p. 47.

    6. 1; rollo, p. 45

    7. People v. Pamor, 237 SCRA 462, 177 (1994); People v. Montefalcon, 305 SCRA 169 (1999).

    8. October 3, 1997 TSN, p. 20.

    9. People v. Padil, 318 SCRA 795, 807 (1999).

    10. Sec. 49, Rule 130, Rules of Court.

    11. September 29, 1997 TSN, pp. 24-26.

    12. October 3, 1997 TSN, pp. 13-18.

    13. Exhibit B.

    14. GR No. 137842, August 23, 2001.

    G.R. No. 132133   November 29, 2001 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. WILLIAM ALPE y CUATRO


    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