PHILIPPINE SUPREME
COURT
DECISIONS
THIRD DIVISION
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Appellee,
G.R.
Nos.
136592-93
November 27, 2003
-versus-
MANOLITO PANCHO,
Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ,
J.:
This is an appeal
from the Joint Decision[1]
dated June 19, 1998 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 15, Malolos,
Bulacan,
finding appellant Manolito Pancho guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
rape
in Criminal Case No. 837-M-96 and attempted rape in Criminal Case No.
838-M-96.
In Criminal Case No. 837-M-96, the trial court sentenced him to suffer
reclusion perpetua, while in Criminal Case No. 838-M-96, the penalty of
10 years and 1 day, as minimum, to 12 years, as maximum of prision
mayor,
was imposed upon him.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The Informations in
both Criminal Case Nos. 837-M-96 and 838-M-96 read:chanrobles virtual law library
For
Criminal
Case No. 837-M-96 (For Rape):chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
"That in
or
about the month of August, 1994, in the municipality of Malolos,
province
of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously, by means of force, threats and intimidation and with
lewd
designs, have carnal knowledge of said Michelle L. dela Torre, 11 years
of age, against her will and without her consent.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"Contrary to
law."
For
Criminal
Case No. 838-M-96 (For Attempted Rape):chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
"That in
or
about the month of December, 1995, in the municipality of Malolos,
province
of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously, by means of force, threats and intimidation and with
lewd
designs, have carnal knowledge of said Michelle L. dela Torre, 11 years
of age, against her will and without her consent.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"Contrary to
law."
Upon arraignment,
appellant,
assisted by counsel, pleaded not guilty to the crimes charged.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Thereafter, trial ensued.
The evidence for the prosecution shows that complainant Michelle dela
Torre
was born on April 2, 1984[2]
to spouses Exequiela Lacanilao and Eduardo dela Torre. After Michelle's
father passed away, her mother contracted a second marriage with
appellant.
Michelle and her two (2) brothers live with the couple at Look First,
Malolos,
Bulacan.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
On August 1, 1994, at
around 6:00 o'clock in the morning, Michelle, who was then only ten
years
old, went home after spending the night at her aunt's house. While she
was about to undress, appellant suddenly dragged her and forced her to
lie down on the floor. Although frightened, she struggled by kicking
and
boxing him. However, he forcibly removed her clothes and underwear.
Then
he took off his clothing. Appellant started kissing and holding her
breast
and eventually had carnal knowledge of her. She felt pain when he
inserted
his organ into her vagina which bled. She tried to resist but he held
her
both arms. He was on top of her making push and pull movements for four
(4) minutes. Then he dressed up, threatening to kill her should she
complain
or tell anyone about the incident.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Sometime in December,
1995 at the family's new residence at Bayugo, Meycauayan, Bulacan,
appellant
arrived from work. When Michelle opened the door and saw him, she got
scared.
While he was approaching her, she managed to hit him. Then she
attempted
to jump out of the window, but he dragged her by her feet. At that
instance,
her uncle (Tito Onio) suddenly arrived.[3]
Immediately, appellant stopped, thus thwarting his bestial
desire. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
After sometime, Michelle
mustered enough courage to report the incidents to her mother, but the
latter casually ignored her. So, she turned to her grandmother
Natividad
Lacanilao, who brought her, sometime in February, 1996, to the National
Bureau of Investigation (NBI) for examination by a medico-legal officer.[4]
Thereafter, they proceeded to the Malolos Police Station where she
executed
a sworn statement.[5]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Dr. Ida P. Daniel, a
Medico-Legal Officer of the NBI, testified that she conducted a
medico-genital
examination of Michelle dela Torre. Her findings,[6]
which she confirmed on the witness stand, are as follows:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"GENERAL
PHYSICAL
EXAMINATION:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Height:
132.0
cms
Weight: 78.0 cms
Normally
developed,
fairly nourished, conscious, coherent, cooperative, ambulatory subject.cralaw:red
Breasts,
developing,
conical, firm. Areolae, brown, 2.5 cms in diameter. Nipples, brown,
protruding,
0.5 cm in diameter.cralaw:red
No sign of
extragenital
physical injury noted.cralaw:red
"GENITAL EXAMINATION:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Pubic
hair,
fine, scanty. Labia majora and minora, coaptated. Fourchette, tense.
Vestibular
mucosa, pinkish. Hymen, moderately tall, moderately thick, intact.
Hymenal
orifice, annular, admits a tube 2.0 cms in diameter with moderate
resistance.
Vaginal walls, tight. Rugosities, prominent.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"CONCLUSIONS:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. No
evident
sign of extragenital physical injury noted on the body of the subject
at
the time of examination.
2. Hymen, intact
and
its orifice small (2.0 cms in diameter) as to preclude complete
penetration
by an average sized adult Filipino male organ in full erection without
producing any genital injury."chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
For his part, appellant
strongly denied the charges, contending that it was impossible for him
to commit the crimes considering that during the incidents, his wife
and
her two sons were also inside the house.[7]
Moreover, the charge of rape is totally belied by the finding of the
NBI
Medico-Legal Officer that Michelle's hymen has remained intact with no
sign of extra-genital or genital injuries.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
After trial, the lower
court rendered a Joint Decision dated June 19, 1998, the dispositive
portion
of which reads:chanrobles virtual law library
"In view of
all the foregoing and by proof beyond reasonable doubt, the Court
hereby
renders judgment as follows:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. With
respect
to Criminal Case No. 837-M-96, the Court finds the accused guilty
beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime charged and hereby sentences accused
MANOLITO
PANCHO to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
2. With respect
to Criminal
Case No. 838-M-96, the Court finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Attempted Rape, and hereby sentences accused
MANOLITO
PANCHO to suffer an imprisonment of TEN (10) YEARS and ONE (1) DAY to
TWELVE
(12) YEARS.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
3. To indemnify
the
victim Michelle dela Torre the amount of P20,000.00 — each case.cralaw:red
"The period of the
accused's
detention is credited in his favor.
"SO ORDERED."
In this appeal,
appellant
ascribes to the trial court the following errors:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
"I
THE LOWER COURT
ERRED
IN FINDING ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE
CRIMES
OF RAPE AND ATTEMPTED RAPE, DESPITE INSUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"II
THE LOWER COURT
ERRED
IN DISREGARDING THE DEFENSE PUT UP BY ACCUSED-APPELLANT."chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As alleged in the
Informations,
the crimes charged were committed sometime in August, 1994 and
December,
1995. Thus, the governing law is Article 335[8]
of the Revised
Penal Code which, as amended by Republic
Act No. 7659 (The Death Penalty Law),[9]
provides:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"Art. 335.
When and how rape is committed. — Rape is committed by having carnal
knowledge
of a woman under any of the following circumstances:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
1. By
using
force or intimidation;
2. When the
woman is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and cralaw:red
3. When the
woman is
under twelve years of age or is demented.cralaw:red
"The crime of rape
shall
be punished by reclusion perpetua. x
x
x
x x
x
x x x
"The death penalty
shall
also be imposed if the crime or rape is committed with any of the
following
attendant circumstances:chanrobles virtual law library
1. When
the
victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a
parent,
ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the third civil degree or the common-law spouse of the parent of
the victim. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
2.
x
x x."
A. — G.R. No. 136592
for
rape:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Rape
under
the above provisions is either simple or qualified. It is qualified
when
the age of the victim (below 18) and her relationship with the
appellant
are both alleged in the Information and proved.[10]
In this case, the prosecution failed to allege in the Information the
qualifying
circumstance that appellant is the victim's step-parent. Thus, he may
only
be convicted of simple rape.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Simple rape is
committed
under any of the following circumstances:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
1. By
using
force or intimidation;
2. When the
woman is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and cralaw:red
3. When the
woman is
under twelve years of age (statutory rape) or is demented.cralaw:red
In the Information,
appellant
is being charged of statutory rape considering that Michelle was then
below
12 years old.
The gravamen of the
offense of statutory rape is carnal knowledge of a woman below twelve
(12)
years old.[11]
In statutory rape, force, intimidation or physical evidence of injury
is
immaterial.[12]
Where the girl is below 12 years of age, violence or intimidation is
not
required, and the only subject of inquiry is whether carnal knowledge
took
place.[13]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As shown by her Certificate
of Live Birth,[14]
Michelle was born on April 2, 1984. Thus, on August 1, 1994 when the
incident
took place, she was only 10 years and 3 months old.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Michelle identified
appellant in open court as the culprit who raped her. She testified as
follows:chanrobles virtual law library
"FISCAL:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Q: Ms. Witness,
you
claim in your testimony that you were raped by your step father
Manolito
Pancho last August 1, 1994, will you please tell this Honorable Court
how
Manolito Pancho raped you?chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
A: About 6:00
o'clock
in the morning I went home, sir.cralaw:red
Q: And where is
your
home located?
A: I went home at
Look
First, Malolos, Bulacan.cralaw:red
Q: And what
happened
when you went home at Look, Malolos, Bulacan?
A: Manolito Pancho
dragged
me and forced me to lie on the floor.cralaw:red
Q: And what
happened
when after Manolito Pancho lay you on the floor?
A: He took off all
my clothes.cralaw:red
Q: And what
clothes
you are wearing at that time, Ms. witness?
A: I was wearing a
t-shirt
and short, sir.cralaw:red
Q: What else
Manolito
Pancho removed?
A: My clothes,
short
and panty, sir.cralaw:red
Q. And what was
your
appearance after these clothes were removed by Manolito Pancho?
A: I was naked,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: How about
Manolito
Pancho, what did he do after he removed your dress?
A: He also
took-off
his clothes, sir.cralaw:red
Q: What clothes
did
he remove?
A: His t-shirt,
short
and brief, sir.cralaw:red
Q: After Manolito
removed
all these: his short, brief and t-shirt, what did he do?
A: He placed
himself
on top of me.cralaw:red
Q: And what
happened
after he placed himself on top of you?
A: He inserted his
penis
on my vagina.cralaw:red
Q: Were you able
to
see his organ when he inserted it on your vagina?
A: Yes, sir.cralaw:red
Q: What happened
when
he inserted his organ on your vagina?
A: He was kissing
me
and touching my body, sir.cralaw:red
Q: What particular
parts
of your body did Manolito Pancho kiss and touch, Ms. witness?
A: My both
breasts,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: And what did
you
feel when Manolito Pancho inserted his organ on your vagina?
A: It hurts, sir.cralaw:red
Q: What motion did
he
do if you can still remember when Manolito Pancho was on top of you?
A: He was kissing
me,
touching me and then I tried to struggle against him but he was holding
my both hands so that I could not struggle.cralaw:red
Q: And what
happened
to your vagina after he inserted his penis?
A: It bled, sir.cralaw:red
Q: How long did
Manolito
Pancho stay on top of you?
A: Four (4)
minutes,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: And after four
(4)
minutes, what did Manolito Pancho do?
A: I already
dressed
up because he already dressed-up, sir.cralaw:red
Q: And what did
Manolito
Pancho tell you, if any?
A: He said, do not
complain
because if you do so, I am going to kill you.cralaw:red
Q: How are you
related
with Manolito Pancho, Ms. witness?
A: My step father,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: At the time you
claimed
that you were raped by Manolito Pancho, will you please tell this
Honorable
Court, how young were you then?
A: Ten (10) years
old,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: Do you have
evidence
to show Ms. witness that you are ten (10) years old at that time?
A: My birth
certificate,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: Do you have
with
you your birth certificate?
A: Yes, sir. (The
grandmother
is producing the Live Birth Certificate of the complainant Michelle
dela
Torre.)
Q: Will you please
tell
this Honorable Court what is your date of birth, Ms. witness?
A: April 2, 1984.cralaw:red
Q: And you claimed
that
you were 10 years old when you were raped by Manolito Pancho?
A: Yes, sir.cralaw:red
x
x
x
x x
x
x x x."[15]
Michelle's testimony is
straightforward, unflawed by significant inconsistency, and unshaken by
rigid cross-examination. It deserves full faith and credence. In rape
cases,
the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the rape victim
if her testimony is credible, natural, and convincing.[16]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
When a woman says she
was raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape
had
been committed, and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, the
accused may be convicted on the basis thereof.[17]
It bears stressing that Michelle, a girl of tender years, innocent and
guileless, cannot be expected to brazenly impute a crime so serious as
rape to her step-father if it were not true. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Appellant vigorously
denied the charge, contending that per the Medical Report of Dr. Ida
Daniel,
Michelle's hymen has remained intact.[18]
We are not persuaded.cralaw:red
Appellant heavily relies
on the virgo intacta theory.[19]
He disregards Dr. Daniel's testimony that there are two types of hymen:chanrobles virtual law library
(1) one
that
remains intact even though there is penetration; andchanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
(2) the other is
lacerated
after penetration.[20]
We have ruled that in
rape
cases the absence of fresh lacerations does not preclude the finding of
rape,[21]
especially when the victim is of tender age.[22]
Moreover, laceration of the hymen is not an element of the crime of
rape.[23]
Hymenal rupture or any indication of vaginal laceration or genital
injury
is not necessary for the consummation of rape.[24]
Its absence does not negate a finding of forced sexual coitus.[25]
For the rule is well settled that rape is consummated by the slightest
penile penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female organ.[26]
Indeed, the evidentiary weight of the medical examination of the
victim,
as well as the medical certificate, is merely corroborative in
character
and is not an indispensable element for conviction for rape.[27]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Appellant's denial is
an inherently weak defense. It has always been viewed upon with
disfavor
by the courts due to the ease with which it can be concocted.[28]
Inherently weak, denial as a defense crumbles in the light of positive
identification of the accused, as in this case. The defense of denial
assumes
significance only when the prosecution's evidence is such that it does
not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.[29]
Verily, mere denial, unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence,
is negative self-serving evidence which cannot be given greater
evidentiary
weight than the testimony of the complaining witness who testified on
affirmative
matters.[30]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
B. — G.R. No. 136593
for attempted rape:chanrobles virtual law library
Appellant
also
contends that his conviction of attempted rape in Criminal Case No.
838-M-96
is not supported by evidence.
Michelle testified
that
when appellant "was coming near me, I hit him and I saw that our door
was
opened. I tried to jump and that was the time he dragged and he held my
feet." 31 Appellant and Michelle were in this snap situation when his
Tito
Onio arrived. 32 Her testimony regarding this incident is quoted as
follows:chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"FISCAL:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary x
x
x
x x
x
x x x
Q: And what
happened
in that place at Bayugo, Meycauayan, Bulacan?
A: When the door
opened
I thought it was my mother and when I saw him I was scared, sir.cralaw:red
Q: And what
happened
when you saw Manolito Pancho?
A: I closed the
door,
sir.cralaw:red
Q: Thereafter,
what
happened?
A: When he was
coming
near me, I hit him and I saw that our door was opened. I tried to jump
and
that was the time he dragged and he held my feet.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: And what
happened
after Manolito Pancho held your feet?
A: When he was
holding
my feet I was not able to jump from the window and that's the time the
door opened and then I saw my uncle that is why the rape was not
committed.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred x
x
x
x x
x
x x x."[33]
Under Art. 6, in
relation
to Art. 335, of the Revised
Penal Code, rape is attempted when the offender commences the
commission
of rape directly by overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of
execution
which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or
accident
other than his own spontaneous desistance.[34]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In this second case,
the prosecution failed to prove that appellant started to rape the
victim
and had commenced the performance of acts of carnal knowledge. He did
not
force her to lie down or remove her garment. In short, there was no
showing
that he did commence at all the performance of any act indicative of an
intent or attempt to rape the victim. What he did was to "drag" her and
hold her feet. At this juncture, we can not safely conclude that he was
attempting to rape her.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In People vs. Campuhan,[35]
we held that the thin line that separates attempted rape from
consummated
rape is the entrance of the male organ into the labial threshold of the
female genitalia. In that case, the accused was caught by the mother of
the victim kneeling on top of her. The victim testified that the
accused's
organ merely touched but did not penetrate her vagina. We held that he
could not be convicted of statutory rape but only attempted rape.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In the instant case,
appellant was merely holding complainant's feet when her Tito Onio
arrived
at the alleged locus criminis. Thus, it would be stretching to the
extreme
our credulity if we were to conclude that mere holding of the feet is
attempted
rape.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Anent the award of damages
in G.R. No. 136592, we observed that the trial court only awarded the
victim
civil indemnity in the amount of P20,000.00. This must be corrected. We
have consistently ruled that upon a finding of the fact of rape, the
award
of civil indemnity is mandatory. If the death penalty is imposed, the
indemnity
ex delicto should be P75,000.00. Where, as here, the death penalty is
not
decreed, the victim should be entitled to P50,000.00 only.[36]
In line with current
jurisprudence, we also award the victim moral damages in the amount of
P50,000.00 without need of pleading or proof of the basis thereof.[37]
The anguish and pain she has endured are evident. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
WHEREFORE, the Decision
dated June 19, 1998 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 15, Malolos,
Bulacan,
in Criminal Case No. 837-M-96, convicting appellant Manolito Pancho of
rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua is
AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that he is ordered to pay the victim,
Michelle
dela Torre, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 as moral
damages.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In Criminal Case No.
838-M-96, the trial court's judgment convicting the appellant of
attempted
rape is REVERSED AND SET ASIDE and a new one is entered ACQUITTING him
of the crime charged.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Costs de oficio.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
SO ORDERED.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Vitug, Corona and Carpio
Morales, JJ., concur.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
____________________________
Endnotes:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
[1]
Penned by Judge Carlos C. Ofilada (retired, now deceased), Rollo at
18–26.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[2]
Certificate of Live Birth, Exhibits "B" and "B-1," Records at 71.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[3]
TSN, January 29, 1997 at 4–5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[4]
TSN, March 12, 1997 at 3–4.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[5]
TSN, February 19, 1997 at 5–6.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[6]
Records at 73.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[7]
TSN, October 28, 1997 at 5–6.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[8]
Anti-Rape Law of 1997, which took effect on October 22, 1997, providing
that rape is a crime against persons (Articles 266-A, 266-B, 266-C, and
266-D, RPC).
[9]
Which took effect on December 31, 1993, People vs. Simon, 234 SCRA 555,
569.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[10]
People vs. Bartolome, G.R. No. 133987, January 28, 2000, 323 SCRA 836.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[11]
People vs. Dalisay, G.R. No. 133926, August 6, 2003, citing People vs.
Libeta, G.R. No. 139231, April 12, 2002, 381 SCRA 21; People vs.
Rullepa,
G.R. No. 131516, March 5, 2003.
[12]
People vs. Ligotan, G.R. No. 119219, September 30, 1996, 262 SCRA 602,
citing People vs. Palicte, G.R. No. 101088, January 27, 1994, 229 SCRA
543.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[13]
People vs. Lerio, G.R. No. 116729, January 31, 2000, 324 SCRA 76.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[14]
Supra; TSN, January 29, 1997 at 3–4; TSN, February 19, 1997 at 2–3;
TSN,
September 9, 1997 at 8.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[15]
TSN, January 29, 1997 at 1–3.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[16]
People vs. Sale, G.R. Nos. 137978–79, November 22, 2000, 345 SCRA 490;
People vs. Alicante, G.R. Nos. 127026–27, May 31, 2000, 332 SCRA 440.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[17]
People vs. Bation, G.R. No. 123160, March 25, 1999, 305 SCRA 253;
People
vs. Ayo, supra; People vs. Balmoria, G.R. Nos. 120620–21, March 20,
1998,
287 SCRA 687. See People vs. Penaso, G.R. No. 121980, February 23,
2000,
326 SCRA 311; People vs. Loriega, G.R. Nos. 116009–10, February 29,
2000,
326 SCRA 675.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[18]
Rollo at 57–58.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[19]
See People vs. Sampior, G.R. No. 117691, March 1, 2000, 327 SCRA 31.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[20]
Rollo at 21, 95; Decision at 4; TSN, September 9, 1997 at 4–5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[21]
People vs. Pruna, G.R. No. 138471, October 10, 2002, citing People vs.
Geraban, G.R. No. 137048, May 24, 2001, 358 SCRA 213.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[22]
People vs. Pruna, supra, citing People vs. Ayo, G.R. No. 123540, March
30, 1999, 305 SCRA 543 and People vs. Bation, G.R. No. 123160, March
25,
1999, 305 SCRA 253. See People vs. Lomibao, G.R. No. 135855, August 3,
2000, 337 SCRA 211.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[23]
People vs. Esteves, G.R. No. 140392, September 27, 2002, citing People
vs. Llamo, G.R. No. 132138, January 28, 2000, 323 SCRA 791; People vs.
Sapinoso, G.R. No. 122540, March 22, 2000, 328 SCRA 649.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[24]
People vs. Deauna, G.R. Nos. 143200–01, August 1, 2002, citing People
vs.
Lerio, supra.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[25]
Id., citing People vs. Almacin, G.R. No. 113253, February 19, 1999, 303
SCRA 399.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[26]
People vs. Pruna, supra, citing People vs. Rafales, G.R. No. 133477,
January
21, 2000, 323 SCRA 13. See People vs. Briones, G.R. No. 140640, October
15, 2002, citing People vs. Barredo, 329 SCRA 120 (2000); People vs.
Balgos,
G.R. No. 126115, January 26, 2000, 323 SCRA 372.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[27]
People vs. Lerio, supra; People vs. Baltazar, 329 SCRA 378 (2000). See
People vs. Auxtero, G.R. No. 118314, April 15, 1998, 289 SCRA 75;
People
vs. Venerable, G.R. No. 110110, May 13, 1998, 290 SCRA 15.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[28]
People vs. Watiwat, G.R. No. 139400, September 3, 2003.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[29]
People vs. Colisao, G.R. No. 134526, December 11, 2001, 372 SCRA 20.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[30]
People vs. Musa, G.R. No. 143703, November 29, 2001, 371 SCRA 234.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[31]
TSN, January 29, 1997 at 4–5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[32]
Id.; Tito Onio is the brother of her mother. See TSN, February 19, 1997
at 3.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[33]
TSN, January 29, 1997 at 4–5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[34]
People vs. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433, March 30, 2000, 329 SCRA 270.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[35]
Id.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[36]
People vs. Dalisay, supra, citing People vs. Armando Tagud, Sr., G.R.
No.
140733, January 30, 2002; People vs. Poñado, 370 Phil. 558
(1999);
People vs. Maglente, 366 Phil. 221 (1999); People vs. Olarte, G.R. Nos.
129530–31, September 24, 2001, 365 SCRA 635; People vs. Elpedes, G.R.
Nos.
137106–07, January 31, 2001, 350 SCRA 716.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[37]
Id., citing People vs. Salalima, G.R. Nos. 137969–71, August 15, 2001,
363 SCRA 193; People vs. Agustin, G.R. Nos. 132524–25, September 24,
2001,
365 SCRA 667.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Back
to Top - Back
to Main Index - Back
to Table of Contents -2003 SC Decisions
- Back
to Home
|