ChanRobles Virtual law Library
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
THIRD DIVISION G.R. No. 187743 : March 3, 2010 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ROLANDO BAUTISTA IROY, Appellant. R E S O L U T I O N NACHURA, J.: For final review by the Court is the trial courts conviction of appellant Rolando Bautista Iroy for qualified rape. In the December 15, 2008 Decision Appellant, a widower and a fish ball vendor, rented a room in the house of prosecution witness Jojo Sarmiento (Sarmiento). Appellant lived there together with his daughter AAA and son BBB. At around 8:30 p.m. on May 31, 2004, while Sarmiento was in the restroom answering the call of nature, he noticed that the partition wall was shaking. He got out of the restroom and moved closer to the partition wall, which also served as the wall of appellants room. Intrigued, Sarmiento peeped through a hole on the wall and, to his surprise, he saw appellant and his daughter standing face to face, with appellants shorts pushed down to his knees, while his daughter AAA was naked. Appellant was having sexual intercourse with his daughter in a standing position. AAA was pushing appellant but the latter persisted in having sexual intercourse with her. After satisfying his lust, appellant ordered his daughter to get dressed.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Sarmiento did not try to stop appellant, since the former was afraid that the latter might create a scandal or commotion. The following day, Sarmiento reported what he saw to their Zone Leader, a certain Evelyn Geraldino (Geraldino), and asked her to report the incident to the police.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary On June 1, 2004, Geraldino called the Municipalitys Public Order and Safety Officer, Abdon C. Lozano (Lozano), and reported the incident. Responding to the report, Lozano immediately went to the house of Geraldino to verify the information. On his way, he met AAA, whom he confronted. AAA readily admitted that her father sexually abused her not only on May 31, 2004, but also on May 15, 2004. Her father purportedly threatened to kill her if she refused to have sexual intercourse with him.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary When examined by Medico-Legal Officer Dr. Paul Ed dela Cruz Ortiz, AAA was found to be in a non-virgin state. Based on the testimony of Ma. Victoria Delfin of the National Statistics Office, AAA was fourteen (14) years old at the time she was sexually abused on May 15 and 31, 2004, it appearing in her Certificate of Live Birth that AAA was born on October 4, 1989.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary For his part, appellant interposed the defense of denial and alleged that AAA charged him with rape because of ill feelings. Appellant alleged that AAA may have harbored ill feelings toward him when he berated and spanked her on two occasions, once on May 15, 2004 and again on May 31, 2004, for allegedly not preparing food and water for him. Appellant purportedly came home tired from vending fish balls on such dates and was irritated when he found no water and food. With respect to Sarmiento, appellant averred that the former wanted him out of his house, that was why he testified against appellant in this case.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Consequently, in an Information dated June 2, 2004, appellant was charged with qualified rape under paragraph 1(a), Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), allegedly committed as follows: That on or about the 15th day of May, 2004, in the City of (PPP), Metro Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, taking advantage of his moral ascendancy and authority, and by means of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of his daughter (AAA), against her will and consent, the crime having been attended by the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority, the accused being the father of the victim who is a fourteen (14) year old minor at the time of the commission of the offense, thereby raising the crime to Qualified Rape aggravated by nighttime, dwelling and abuse of superior strength. CONTRARY TO LAW.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Subsequently, another Information of even date, similarly charging appellant with qualified rape, was filed before the trial court. Except for the date of the alleged commission, which was May 31, 2004, said Information was committed against the same victim and was similarly worded as the first Information.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary The defense attempted to discredit the testimony of Sarmiento by arguing that it was highly unlikely for a man to consummate rape while in a standing position. Appellant insinuated that the alleged sexual intercourse in a standing position was improbable unless both parties acted in concert. He further sought to establish that the sexual intercourse, if any, took place with the consent of AAA, owing to the absence of any outcry or sufficient resistance on her part. Appellant likewise harped on the alleged failure of AAA to report the rape incident to her brother or to her relatives.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary After trial on the merits, the RTC rendered the June 22, 2007 Decision, On review, the appellate court affirmed with modification the ruling of the trial court as follows: WHEREFORE, the appealed Decision, dated 22 June 2007, of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City (Branch 69) in Criminal Case No. 128201-H, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that, in addition to the award of civil indemnity of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos ( another Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos ( SO ORDERED. In their respective Manifestations The case having been elevated to this Court, we now finally review the trial and the appellate courts findings. The instant appeal is bereft of merit.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary It is settled that sexual intercourse in a standing position, while perhaps uncomfortable, is not improbable. Furthermore, we are not persuaded by appellants contention that the victim offered no resistance to appellants sexual advances, for as testified to by Sarmiento, AAA continuously pushed appellant while the latter was raping her. We also disagree with the contention that the victims failure to shout for help is fatal to the charge of rape. Physical resistance is not an essential element of the felony and need not be established when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and the latter submits herself, against her will, to the rapists embrace because of fear for her life and personal safety. Verily, AAAs failure to report the rape to her family or to the police authorities does not weaken the prosecutions case, the victims hesitation being attributable to her age, the moral ascendancy of the appellant and his threats to the former.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary The RTC found all the prosecution witnesses to be credible witnesses, whose testimonies were natural and convincing, thus, deserving of full faith and credence. It bears stressing that full weight on and respect for the determination by the trial court of the credibility of witnesses is usually accorded by the appellate courts, since a trial court judge has the opportunity to observe the demeanor of these witnesses. We have reviewed the records of the RTC and the CA, and we find no justification to deviate from both courts' findings and their unanimous conclusion that appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape under Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B of the RPC. To convict appellant of the offense, the prosecution must allege and prove the ordinary elements of (1) sexual congress, (2) with a woman, (3) by force and without consent; and in order to warrant the imposition of the death penalty, the additional elements that (4) the victim is under eighteen years of age at the time of the rape, and (5) the offender is a parent (whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted) of the victim. The prosecution was able to prove the existence of all these elements beyond the shadow of a doubt.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary Accordingly, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was properly meted out. Under Article 266-B of the RPC, an accused found guilty of qualified rape should be meted the supreme penalty of death. However, with the enactment of Republic Act No. 9346, entitled "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines," the imposition of the death penalty has been prohibited. Pursuant to Section 2 thereof, the penalty to be imposed on appellant shall be reclusion perpetua. Said section reads: Sec. 2. In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed:
cralawNotwithstanding the reduction of the penalty imposed on appellant, he is not eligible for parole following Section 3 of said law, which provides: Sec. 3. Person convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.chanroblesvirtua|awlibary The appellate court correctly ruled when it modified that, in addition to the award of civil indemnity of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos ( It, however, erred when it only awarded Twenty-Five Thousand Pesos ( WHEREFORE, premises considered, the December 15, 2008 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 02947 is AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION that the award for exemplary damages is increased to SO ORDERED. ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA WE CONCUR: RENATO C. CORONA
JOSE CATRAL MENDOZA A T T E S T A T I O N I attest that the conclusions in the above Resolution had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division. RENATO C. CORONA C E R T I F I C A T I O N Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division Chairperson's Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Resolution had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division. REYNATO S. PUNO cralaw Endnotes:
|
|