ChanRobles Virtual law Library




SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS





www.chanrobles.com

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. L-40462 July 31, 1984

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GIL MUNAR, Defendant-Appellant.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.chanrobles virtual law library

Geronimo F. Abellera for defendant-appellant.

MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.:

The accused Gil Munar, appeals his conviction for the crime of Rape by the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, Branch IX, on August 20, 1971, which sentenced him to an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as maximum, to indemnify the offended party, a mentally retarded girl of 19 years of age, in the sum of P5,000.00, and to pay the costs of suit. 1chanrobles virtual law library

In a Resolution, dated December 23, 1974, the Court of Appeals (now Intermediate Appellate Court) where the appeal was initially brought, certified the case to this Tribunal on the ground that since the lowest penalty prescribed for rape is reclusion perpetua, the same is within our exclusive appellate jurisdiction. 2 However, on January 30, 1984, in conformity with our ruling in People vs. Daniel, 3we returned the records of the case to the Intermediate Appellate Court for the determination of the proper penalty as the circumstances warrant, with a comprehensive written analysis of the evidence and discussion of the law involved, but the Intermediate Appellate Court shall refrain from entering judgment, and shall thereafter certify the case and elevate the entire records thereof to this Court for review.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Conformably to that directive, on March 21, 1984, the Appellate Court, in a Decision penned by Justice Lorna S. Lombos-de la Fuente and concurred in by Justices Emilio A. Gancayco and Isidro C. Borromeo, found that the appealed judgment should be modified such that the imposable penalty shall be reclusion perpetua inasmuch as the rape was committed with the use of a deadly weapon, and its commission was not attended by any modifying circumstances. 4The case is with us now for review, without any judgment having been entered in the Appellate Court.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Upon a careful review of the evidence, we sustain the factual findings and conclusions of law embodied in the Appellate Court's judgment, and, therefore, adopt the same and append it as an integral part of this Decision (Annex "A").chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The fact that complainant was feeble-minded, whose actual age at the time of the incident was 19 years but whose mental age was that of a 5-year-old child, does not affect her credibility. As stated by the Trial Court, her answers were intelligible enough to be understood. 5She could convey her thoughts by words and signs. And, as the examining physician of the National Mental Hospital testified, the mental deficiency does not prevent her from recalling painful experiences. 6 She is a competent witness. 7 There may have been inconsistencies in her testimony, but the same are minor and do not detract from the vital fact that she had, in fact, been abused by the accused in the manner that she had narrated. Neither the Trial Court nor the Appellate Court, therefore, erred in giving weight and credence to her testimony, there being no improper motive shown. 8chanrobles virtual law library

The denials by the accused, specifically, that the complainant did not go to his store on the day the incident allegedly took place, and that he never had sexual intercourse with the complainant 9 do not deserve credence in the face of the positive and unwavering Identification of the accused by the complainant. She testified that on March 2, 1967 when she went to buy starch from the accused in his store, the latter asked her to go inside and then with a knife in hand, forced her to lie down, then raised her dress, threw her panty away and had sexual intercourse with her. 10 That the carnal assault did take place is corroborated by the genital examination made by the Municipal Health Officer on The complainant. 11

The accused's testimony that the motive of the complainant's family in firing the trumped-up case against him was that the mother owes him P 133.00 while the brother owes him P250.00 for goods taken on credit, for which he demanded payment, 12 was belied by complainant's mother, who declared that they do not owe money to the accused. 13 In fact, the accused himself testified that he stopped extending credit to complainant's family since 1964 and did not collect the debt anymore. 14

Considering that the rape was committed with the use of a knife, a deadly weapon, and in the absence of any modifying circumstances attending its commission, the penalty of reclusion perpetua conforms to Article 335 in relation to Article 63(2) of the Revised Penal Code.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, we affirm the judgment of conviction imposed upon the accused. Gil Munar, and sentence him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with the modification that the indemnification to the offended party is hereby increased to P15,000.00. Costs against the accused-appellant.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.

Plana, Relova and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ., concur, chanrobles virtual law library

Teehankee, J., concurs in the result.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

De la Fuente, J., took no part.

Endnotes:


1 Original Record, pp. 260 & 261.chanrobles virtual law library

2 Rollo, p. 55.chanrobles virtual law library

3 86 SCRA 511 (1978).chanrobles virtual law library

4 Rollo, p. 66.chanrobles virtual law library

5 Decision, p. 10; Original Record, p. 259.chanrobles virtual law library

6 T.S.N., September 10, 1969, pp. 42, 44 & 47.chanrobles virtual law library

7 vide People vs. De Jesus, G. R. No. L-39087, April 27, 1984.chanrobles virtual law library

8 People vs. Coderes, 104 SCRA 255 (1981); People vs. Blas, 106 SCRA 305 (1981).chanrobles virtual law library

9 T.S.N., September 24, 1970, pp. 21 & 22,

10 T.S.N., March 18, 1969, continuation of Hearing pp. 1-4 & 15-17.chanrobles virtual law library

11 Exhibit "A ", Original Record, p. 3.chanrobles virtual law library

12 T.S.N., September 24, 1970, p. 19.chanrobles virtual law library

13 T.S.N., September 10, 1969, p, 56.chanrobles virtual law library

14 T.S.N., September 24, 1970, pp. 26 & 27.




























chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com