September 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[G.R. No. 186413 : September 05, 2011]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. EDDIE BEN CABREROS
G.R. No. 186413 (People of the Philippines v. Eddie Ben Cabreros). - We resolve the appeal, filed by accused Eddie Ben Cabreros (appellant), from the June 20, 2008 decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR. No. 02663.[1] The CA affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 50 of Villasis, Pangasinan, which found the appellant guilty of rape and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.[2]
In its January 9, 2007 decision, the RTC found the appellant guilty of rape committed against AAA,[3] 16 years of age, sometime in the evening of December 2000. It gave full credence to AAA's testimony, which it found to be simple and straightforward. The RTC rejected the appellant's denial and alibi for his failure to show that it was physically impossible for him to have committed the crime.
The RTC imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered the accused to indemnify AAA the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
On intermediate appellate review, the CA affirmed the appellant's guilt and the awarded indemnities. It rejected his claim that the RTC committed a grave error in convicting him based on an Information that was insufficient because of the prosecution's failure to allege the exact place where the rape was committed. The CA ruled that the defect in the Information was considered waived when the appellant did not move to quash the information before he entered his plea.cralaw
Our Ruling
We dismiss the appeal and additionally award exemplary damages.
After a review of the records, we see no reason to disturb the findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. AAA's testimony was credible and sufficient to sustain a verdict of conviction, unlike the appellant's defenses of denial and alibi which are inherently weak. We likewise agree with the CA that the appellant waived the defect in the Information. Subject to certain exceptions, the failure of the accused to assert any ground for a motion to quash before he pleads to the Information � either because he did not file a motion to quash or failed to allege such ground in the motion � shall be deemed a waiver of objections to the Information.[4] Moreover, objections to the Information, either in form or in substance, cannot be made for the first time on appeal.[5]
The place of the commission of the offense is not an essential element of the crime of rape.[6] Where time or place is not an essential element of the crime charged, conviction may ensue on proof of the commission of the crime, even if the crime was not committed at the precise time or place alleged, for as long as the specific crime charged was in fact committed prior to the date of the filing of the complaint or information within the period of the statute of limitations and at a place within the jurisdiction of the court.[7] In this case, the RTC has jurisdiction over both places, i.e., that alleged in the information and where the rape was actually committed.
On the civil liabilities, we affirm the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages, based on prevailing jurisprudence.[8] In addition, we award P25,000.00 as exemplary damages to serve as deterrent to elders who abuse and corrupt the youth, as well as to protect the latter from sexual abuse.[9]cralaw
WHEREFORE, the Decision dated June 20, 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR. No. 02663, finding the appellant guilty of rape, is AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00 is additionally ordered awarded.
SO ORDERED.
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 Rosmari D. Carandang, and concurred in by Associate Justices Portia Ali�o-Hormachuelos and Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe; rollo, pp. 2-13.[2] CA rollo, pp. 12-24.
[3] The real name of the rape victim is withheld and, instead, fictitious initials are used to represent her (People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, 502 SCRA 419).
[4] Section 9, Rule 117, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure (A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC, effective December 1, 2000).
[5] Francisco, Criminal Procedure, 1969, second ed., 610.
[6] For conviction in the crime of rape, the following elements must be proved beyond reasonable doubt: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) that said act was accomplished (a) through the use of force or intimidation, or (b) when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the victim is under 12 years of age or is demented.
[7] People v. Ferolino, 386 Phil. 161, 173 (2000), citing People v. Lucas, G.R. Nos. 108172-73, May 25, 1994, 232 SCRA 537, 547, and People v. Losano, 369 Phil. 966 (1999).
[8] People v. Arcosiba, G.R. No. 181081, September 4, 2009, 598 SCRA 517; People v. Impas, G.R. No. 176157, June 18, 2009, 589 SCRA 565; People v. Montesclaros, G.R. No. 181084, June 16, 2009. 589 SCRA 320.
[9] People v. Layco, Sr., G.R. No. 182191, May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 803, 808.
[*] Reyes, J., on official leave: Mendoza, J., designated as Additional Member per Special Order No. 1066 dated August 23, 2011.