October 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 188563 : October 19, 2011]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. ROMEO REGALARIO
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 19 October 2011 which reads as follows:
G.R. No. 188563 (People of the Philippines v. Romeo Regalario) - We resolve the appeal, filed by accused Romeo Regalario (appellant), from the 20 March 2009 Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03148.[1]
The RTC Ruling
In its 15 October 2007 judgment,[2] the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Gumaca Quezon, Branch 61, convicted appellant of rape[3] committed against a 4 year-old girl, AAA,[4] on 11 January 2005. It gave credence to AAA's testimony, which it found to be truthful and sincere.[5] It rejected appellant's defense of denial for being weak and unsubstantiated by evidence. The RTC sentenced appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay AAA the amount of P50,000 as civil indemnity and P50,000 as exemplary damages.
The CA Ruling
In the intermediate appellate review, the CA affirmed the RTC's appreciation of the clear and straightforward testimony of AAA that appellant had raped her.[6] The CA further held that, "the intact hymen, negative finding of spermatozoa and normal mental condition, gait and vaginal smear do not negate the fact that AAA was raped."[7] It argued that in rape cases, medical evidence is merely corroborative and is even dispensable.[8] The CA sentenced appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. It also affirmed the RTC's Order that appellant pay AAA the amount of P50,000. The appellate court, however, reduced the exemplary damages awarded by the trial court to P25,000.
We now rule on the final review of the case.
Our Ruling
We deny the appeal, but modify the awarded indemnities.
After a careful review of the records of the case, we see no reason to reverse or modify the findings of the RTC on the credibility of AAA's testimony, more so in the present case, wherein the said findings were affirmed by the CA. The qualifying circumstance of age was properly alleged in the Information and duly proved at the trial. The Information contained this allegation, and the Certificate of Live Birth of AAA was presented as evidence before the lower court to prove that she was under seven years of age at the time of the incident.
Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code,[9] the death penalty shall be imposed when the rape victim is a child below seven years old. Since the imposition of death penalty has been prohibited by Republic Act No. 9346, the RTC and the CA correctly imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.
While we affirm the CA's factual findings and the penalty of imprisonment imposed, we find it necessary to increase the amounts awarded to her to P75,000, P75,000, and P30,000 for civil, moral, and exemplary damages, respectively, to conform with prevailing jurisprudence.[10]
WHEREFORE, the 20 March 2009 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-GR. CR-H.C. No. 03148 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Appellant Romeo Regalario is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. He is ordered to pay AAA P75,000 as civil indemnity, P75,000 as moral damages, and P30,000 as exemplary damages. (Perlas-Bernabe, J., designated additional member in lieu of Perez, J., per S.O. No. 1114)
Very truly yours,
MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Division Clerk of
Court
By:
(Sgd.) TERESITA
AQUINO TUAZON
Deputy Division Clerk of
Court
Endnotes:
[1] Penned by Associate Justice Remedios A. Salazar-Fernando, and concurred in by Associate Justices Fernando Lampas Peralta and Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr.; CA rollo, pp. 124-133.
[2] Docketed as Criminal Case No. 8793-G; CA rollo, pp. 26-38.
[3] See REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 266-A, in relation to Section 5 of RA 7610. "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes."
[4] On account of the minority of the rape victim, her real name is withheld and fictitious initials are used to represent her. (People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, 19 September 2006, 502 SCRA 419.)
[5] CA rollo, p. 150.
[6] Rollo, p. 6.
[7] Id. at 9.
[8] Id.
[9] As Amended by RA 8353, the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, which took effect on 22 October 1997
[10] People of the Philippines v. Felipe Nachor y Omayam, G.R. No. 177779, 14 December 2010: and People of the Philippines v. Wenceslao Deri y Benitez, G.R. No. 166566, 23 November 2010