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


EN BANC

[G.R. Nos. 132625-31. December 18, 2000

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. NOEL SANDOVAL, Accused-Appellant.

D E C I S I O N

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.: chanrobles virtual law library

For ravishing his two (2) minor step-daughters, Noel Sandoval was charged in seven (7) separate Informations with seven (7) counts of Rape, five of which were committed against Teresa Micu, then thirteen (13) years old, and two counts of statutory rape committed against Victoria Rhea Micu, then only eleven (11) years old as evidenced by her Birth Certificate.1 The Informations were filed before the Regional Trial Court of Dagupan, Pangasinan, Branch 42, and allege as follows: chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01815-D chanrobles virtual law library

That on or about May 5, 1995 at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the undersigned complainant TERESA MICU y FERNANDEZ, against her will and consent, to the damage and prejudice of the latter. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY TO LAW. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01816-D chanrobles virtual law library

That on or about May 9, 1995 at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the undersigned complainant TERESA MICU y FERNANDEZ, against her will and consent to the damage and prejudice of the latter. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY TO LAW. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01817-D chanrobles virtual law library

That on or about April 24, 1995 at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the undersigned complainant TERESA MICU y FERNANDEZ, against her will and consent, to the damage and prejudice of the latter. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY TO LAW. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01818-D chanrobles virtual law library

That on or about April 18, 1995 at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the undersigned complainant TERESA MICU y FERNANDEZ, against her will and consent to the damage and prejudice of the latter. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY TO LAW. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01819-D chanrobles virtual law library

That on or about May 5, 1995 at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the undersigned complainant TERESA MICU y FERNANDEZ, against her will and consent to the damage and prejudice of the latter. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY TO LAW. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01820-D chanrobles virtual law library

That sometime in April 2, 1997 in the evening thereof, at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the stepfather, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse in their conjugal house with VICTORIA RHEA F. MICU, who is under twelve (12) years old, against her will and consent, to her damage and prejudice. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY to Art. 335, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code, in relation to R.A. 7659. chanrobles virtual law library

In Criminal Case No. 97-01821-D chanrobles virtual law library

That sometime in April 5, 1997 in the evening thereof, at barangay Casibong, municipality of San Jacinto, province of Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the stepfather, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did, then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse in their conjugal house with VICTORIA RHEA F. MICU, who is under twelve (12) years old, against her will and consent, to her damage and prejudice. chanrobles virtual law library

CONTRARY to Art. 335, par. 3 of the Revised Penal Code, in relation to R.A. 7659. chanrobles virtual law library

Accused-appellant was arraigned on July 23, 1997 for the first five (5) counts of rape, wherein he pleaded NOT GUILTY. The following day, the Public Prosecutor filed a Motion for Leave to Amend the five (5) criminal complaints to allege the relationship of the victim and the accused. On July 31, 1997, accused-appellant was scheduled to be arraigned for the other two (2) counts of rape but he failed to appear because of lack of notice on the Provincial Warden. At this point, the Public Prosecutor called the attention of the Court to the Amended Informations he filed in the first five (5) cases, to which accused-appellant has already been arraigned and has pleaded not guilty on July 23, 1997. Counsel for the defense objected on the ground that the amendment would prejudice the right of accused-appellant. chanrobles virtual law library

The court a quo ruled that since there was no evidence yet presented, the matter of amendment should be brought at the proper time after the prosecution has presented its evidence. Thus, the resolution of the Motion to Amend Information in Criminal Cases Nos. 97-01815-D, 97-01816-D, 97-01817-D, 97-01818-D and 97-01819-D was held in abeyance. Meanwhile, on August 7, 1997, accused-appellant was arraigned and pleaded NOT GUILTY to the two (2) counts of statutory rape in Criminal Cases Nos. 97-01820-D and 97-01821-D. Thereafter, aint trial of all the seven (7) cases was conducted. The prosecution presented five (5) witnesses, including the two (2) complainants while on the other hand, the defense presented three (3) witnesses including the accused-appellant. chanrobles virtual law library

On January 9, 1998, the court a quo rendered its decision,2 the dispositive portion of which reads: chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the accused NOEL SANDOVAL is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of six (6) counts of the crime of rape in Criminal Cases Nos. 97-01815-D, 97-01816-D, 97-01817-D, 97-01819-D, 97-01820-D and 97-01821-D and is hereby sentenced to suffer the mandatory penalty of DEATH for each act of rape. In addition, he is ordered to pay P50,000.00 as moral damages for each case or a total of P300,000.00. Also for each count of rape, he is further ordered to pay P5,000.00 as exemplary damages as example for the public good or a total of P30,000.00. He is however acquitted in Criminal Case No. 97-01818-D for insufficiency of evidence. chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED. chanrobles virtual law library

In view of the penalty imposed, the records were elevated to this Court for automatic review pursuant to Article 47 of the Revised Penal Code and Rule 122, Section 10 of the Rules of Court. chanrobles virtual law library

Accused-appellant seeks the reversal of his conviction on the following grounds:

I chanrobles virtual law library

The court a quo erred in convicting the accused-appellant of the crime of Rape on the person of Teresa Micu and imposing the death penalty upon him notwithstanding the fact that, at the time of the alleged commission, he was not yet married to the victims mother.

II chanrobles virtual law library

The court a quo erred in convicting the accused-appellant of the crime of Rape over Rhea Micu, considering her lack of credibility which finds support in the medical findings of the physician who examined her.

III chanrobles virtual law library

The court a quo erred in awarding damages to the complainants notwithstanding that the latter never testified to establish the same and the only basis of such on record is the testimony of their aunt, Perlita Fernandez, who is not their legal guardian. chanrobles virtual law library

After a thorough scrutiny of the records of the case at bar, this Court finds that the trial court did not err in convicting accused-appellant of the crime of rape on the person of Teresa Micu. During her testimony, she clearly and convincingly established before the court a quo the facts and circumstances that transpired during the several occasions when accused-appellant raped her.3 chanrobles virtual law library

The rule has always been that in the matter of credibility of witnesses, factual findings of the trial court should be highly respected. The trial judge is in a better position to pass judgment on the credibility of witnesses, having had the opportunity to personally hear them, observe their deportment and manner of testifying and detect if they were telling the truth.4 We find no reason to depart from this rule in this particular case. It should be remembered also that courts usually give credence to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault because, ordinarily, no person would be willing to undergo the humiliation of a public trial and to testify on the details of her ordeal were it not to condemn an injustice.5 chanrobles virtual law library

However, we cannot agree with the trial courts imposition of the death penalty on accused-appellant for the rape of Teresa Micu. The pertinent law in effect at the time of commission of the crimes in this case, Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of R.A. 7659, provides: chanrobles virtual law library

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 virtual law library

1. By using force or intimidation;

x x x chanrobles virtual law library

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:

1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim. x x x. (Underscoring ours) chanrobles virtual law library

The above-quoted provision states, inter alia, that where the victim of the crime of rape is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a common-law spouse of the parent of the victim, the death penalty shall be imposed. This is one of the seven (7) modes enumerated in Section 11 of R.A. No. 7659 which are considered special circumstances specifically applicable to the crime of rape. In the subsequent cases of People v. Ilao[6 and People v. Medina,[7 it was ruled that the seven new attendant circumstances in Section 11 of R.A. No. 7659 partake of the nature of qualifying circumstances and not merely aggravating circumstances, since said qualifying circumstances are punishable by the single indivisible penalty of death and not by reclusion perpetua to death. A qualifying circumstance increases it to a higher penalty while an aggravating circumstance affects only the period of the penalty but does not increase it to a higher degree. Unlike a generic aggravating circumstance which may be proved even if not alleged, a qualifying aggravating circumstance cannot be proved as such unless alleged in the information. chanrobles virtual law library

A reading of the Information for the rape of Teresa Micu filed against accused-appellant reveals that he was merely charged with the crime of simple rape. The fact that accused-appellant is the common-law spouse of the victims parent is not alleged in the Information. What was stated therein was only the minority of the victim. As we have emphasized, the elements of minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender must be both alleged.8 As such, the special qualifying circumstance stated in Section 11 of RA 7659 was not properly pleaded in the Information. Thus, the penalty of death prescribed in RA 7659 can not be imposed on accused-appellant. Indeed, it would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the charges against him and, consequently, a denial of due process if he is charged with simple rape and be convicted of its qualified form punishable with death although the attendant circumstances qualifying the offense and resulting in the capital punishment was not alleged in the indictment on which he was arraigned.[9 chanrobles virtual law library

The amendment sought by the prosecution of the five informations, in order to allege the relationship of accused-appellant to the victim, were clearly substantial in character as they had the effect of changing the crime charged, thereby exposing accused-appellant to a higher penalty. Such amendment can no longer be done after accused-appellant has pleaded to the Information for simple rape on July 23, 1997,[10 without violating his constitutional rights. Rule 110, Section 14 of the Rules of Court, provides: chanrobles virtual law library

The information or complaint may be amended, in substance or form, without leave of court, at anytime before the accused pleads; and thereafter and during the trial as to all matters of form, by leave and at the discretion of the court, when the same can be done, without prejudice to the rights of the accused. x x x. chanrobles virtual law library

In sum, the failure of the prosecution to allege the relationship of the accused to the victim has effectively removed the crime from the ambit of Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, which prescribes the death penalty 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.[11 In the recent cases of People v. Calayca,12 People v. Tabion13 and People v. Acala,14 where the prosecution failed to allege the fact of minority of the victim in the Informations, we reduced the penalty imposed from death to reclusion perpetua. chanrobles virtual law library

Anent the second assigned error, accused-appellant attempts to discredit Rhea Micu, the second victim, by invoking the findings of the examining physician, Dr. Luisa Cayabyab, to the effect that she could not tell whether force attended the laceration of Rheas organ and that even the tip of her finger could not reach the said complainants cervix when she attempted to check the same.[15 According to accused-appellant, this shows that the victim had never experienced sexual intercourse. chanrobles virtual law library

Appellants claim is without merit. chanrobles virtual law library

A circumspect scrutiny of Dr. Cayabyabs testimonial declarations discloses that they were not conclusive. As a matter of fact, the medical examination, standing alone, is not sufficient to prove nor disprove the fact of rape. On the contrary, her testimony even tended to clarify the apparent conflict pointed out by accused-appellant, viz: chanrobles virtual law library

Q Likewise one of your findings is that her vagina admits one finger, in this finding of yours, it does not show any force or can be interpreted that there was no force of inserting something on the vagina of the patient, is that right? chanrobles virtual law library

A I cannot say directly that there was no force because the vagina is so elastic like a rubber, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q And so you can conclude that there was really no force? chanrobles virtual law library

A I cannot say that there was no force because as I have said the vaginal canal is so elastic, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

COURT chanrobles virtual law library

Q There may be force or no force? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, Your Honor. chanrobles virtual law library

Proceed, chanrobles virtual law library

ATTY. TAMINAYA chanrobles virtual law library

Q When you stated in your findings, admits one finger, could you tell this Court that there was no penis yet or any object that was inserted? chanrobles virtual law library

A As I have said, the vaginal canal is so elastic so I cannot say if there was or there was no object that was inserted, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

COURT chanrobles virtual law library

Q Was there something introduced into the vagina or inserted inside? chanrobles virtual law library

A Maybe yes, maybe no, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q I think that the hymen can tell you that something was inserted into the vagina because of the laceration? chanrobles virtual law library

A It is possible, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Proceed. chanrobles virtual law library

ATTY. TAMINAYA chanrobles virtual law library

Q In this case, there was no showing that the hymen was lacerated? chanrobles virtual law library

A There was healed laceration, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

COURT chanrobles virtual law library

Q But whether or not the laceration was caused by force or no force, you could not tell? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, Your Honor.16 chanrobles virtual law library

In the crime of rape, complete or full penetration of the complainants private part is not necessary. Neither is the rupture of the hymen essential. What is fundamental is that the entrance or at least the introduction of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum is proved. The mere introduction of the male organ into the labia majora of the victims genitalia and not the full penetration of the complainants private part consummates the crime.17 More importantly, it has been ruled in People v. San Juan[18 that in crimes against chastity, the medical examination of the victim is not an indispensable element for the successful prosecution of the crime, as her testimony alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict the accused thereof. chanrobles virtual law library

As found by the court a quo, Rheas testimonies were overwhelmingly straightforward, logical and convincing as to be worthy of belief and impervious to a mere denial by accused-appellant Noel Sandoval, to wit: chanrobles virtual law library

Q Sometime in the evening of April 2, 1997, do you remember where you were? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Where were you? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was in Brgy. Casibong, San Jacinto, Pangasinan, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Where in Brgy. Casibong were you staying? chanrobles virtual law library

A In the house of my step-father, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Your step-father, you are referring to the accused in this case? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q While you were in the house of your step-father in the evening of April 2, 1997, where were you in relation to that house? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was inside the house, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What were you doing at that precise time? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was tending the small child to sleep, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What is the name of that small child? chanrobles virtual law library

A John, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q While you were tending the small child by the name of John, what happened next after that? chanrobles virtual law library

A While tending, I was able to sleep, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Were you awakened? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why were you awakened, could you explain to the Honorable Court? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was awaken because somebody went on top of me, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q When somebody went on top of you, who was that person? chanrobles virtual law library

A Noel Sandoval, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q When Noel Sandoval went on top of you, what happened next after that? chanrobles virtual law library

A He removed my shortpant and my pantie, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q After Noel Salvador removed your shortpant and pantie, what did Noel Sandoval do, if he did anything? chanrobles virtual law library

A After he removed my shortpant and my pantie, Noel Sandoval also removed his pants and brief and thereafter, he inserted his penis into my vagina, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q After Noel Sandoval inserted his penis to your vagina, what did Noel Sandoval do, if he did anything? chanrobles virtual law library

A He kissed me, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What part of your body did Noel Sandoval kiss you? chanrobles virtual law library

A My neck, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What else? chanrobles virtual law library

A Only my neck, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q On April 5, 1997, do you remember where you were? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was also in the house of my step-father, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What were you doing in that precise time of the day? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was already asleep then, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Were you awakened? chanrobles virtual law library

A Yes, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why? Could you explain before the Honorable Court why you were awakened on the evening of April 5, 1997? chanrobles virtual law library

A I was awakened because I felt pain, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why did you feel pain. chanrobles virtual law library

A I felt pain inside my vagina, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q Why? Can you explain before the Honorable Court why you felt pain in your vagina? chanrobles virtual law library

A Because my step-father inserted his penis inside my vagina, sir. chanrobles virtual law library

Q What part of the house of your step-father did he insert his penis? chanrobles virtual law library

A Inside the house, sir.19 chanrobles virtual law library

It is a well-settled rule that an affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony, especially so when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness.[20 chanrobles virtual law library

We agree with the trial court that the evidence for the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that Noel Sandoval is guilty of the rape of Rhea Micu. However, as in the other four cases, the death penalty can not be imposed on him. The prosecution failed to prove that accused-appellant was legally married to the victims mother, in order to substantiate the allegation in the Amended Informations in Criminal Cases Nos. 01820-D and 01821-D that the accused-appellant is the stepfather of the victim. In People v. Brigildo,21 a stepdaughter was defined as the daughter of ones spouse by a previous marriage or the daughter of one of the spouses by a previous marriage. It is the burden of the prosecution to prove with certainty the fact that the victim was the stepdaughter of the accused-appellant to justify the imposition of the death penalty. Corollarily, the prosecution must establish that accused-appellant is legally married to the victims mother. In order that the qualifying circumstances under Section 11 of R.A. 7659, which raises the penalty of rape to death, can be appreciated, the circumstances must be both alleged and proved. Accordingly, the proper penalty for the two counts of rape against Rhea Micu is reclusion perpetua. chanrobles virtual law library

Finally, we affirm the trial courts award of moral and exemplary damages to the complainants notwithstanding that the latter never testified to establish the same. chanrobles virtual law library

The award of moral damages for rape is proper as it is provided in Article 2219 (3) of the Civil Code. In accordance with prevailing jurisprudence, accused-appellant should be made to pay P50,000.00, especially considering that the offended parties were of tender age at the time of the crime.22 In People v. Prades,23 it was ruled that the award of moral damages to the victim is proper even if there was no proof presented during the trial as basis therefor. The fact that the complainant suffered the trauma of mental, physical and psychological sufferings which constitute the bases for moral damages are too obvious to still require the recital thereof at the trial by the victim, since the Court itself even assumes and acknowledges such agony on her part as a gauge of her credibility.[24 chanrobles virtual law library

On the other hand, exemplary damages may also be awarded in criminal cases as part of the civil liability if the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances.25 Accused-appellant being the stepfather of the victims, relationship should be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance under Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code. chanrobles virtual law library

In addition to moral and exemplary damages, civil indemnity must also be awarded to the victims since it is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape.[26 The recent judicial prescription is that the indemnification for the victim shall be in the amount of P50,000.00 for each count of rape if the death penalty is not imposed.27 chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Dagupan, Pangasinan, Branch 42, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant Noel Sandoval is found guilty of four (4) counts of simple rape committed against Teresa Micu and two (2) counts of simple rape committed against Victoria Rhea Micu, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA for each of the six (6) counts. chanrobles virtual law library

Further, accused-appellant is ordered to pay P50,000.00 for each of the six (6) counts of rape, or a total of P300,000.00, as moral damages; P10,000.00 for each of the six (6) counts of rape, or a total of P60,000.00, as exemplary damages; and P50,000.00 for each of the six (6) counts of rape, or a total of P300,000.00, as civil indemnity. chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED. chanrobles virtual law library

Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Pardo, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes, and De Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.



Endnotes:

[1 Exhibit A.

[2 Penned by Judge Luis M. Fontanilla.

[3 TSN, September 12, 1997, pp. 5-10.

[4 People v. Apongan, 270 SCRA 713, 729 (1997).

[5 People v. Adora, 275 SCRA 441, 467 (1997).

[6 296 SCRA 658, 670 (1998).

[7 300 SCRA 98, 116 (1998).

[8 People v. Ramos, 296 SCRA 559, 576 (1998); People v. Arves, G.R. Nos. 134628-30, October 13, 2000.

[9 People v. Masac, G.R. No. 130332, May 31, 2000.

[10 Record, p. 18.

[11 People v. Bayya, G.R. No. 127845, March 10, 2000.

[12 301 SCRA 192, 210 (1999).

[13 317 SCRA 126, 145 (1999).

[14 307 SCRA 330, 359-360 (1999).

[15 TSN, September 9, 1997, p. 11.

[16 TSN, September 9, 1997, pp. 7-8.

[17 People v. Cura, 240 SCRA 234, 242 (1995).

[18 270 SCRA 693, 709 (1997).

[19 TSN, October 6, 1997, pp. 3-5.

[20 People v. San Juan, supra.

[21 G.R. No. 124129, January 28, 2000, citing People v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 130514, June 17, 1999, p. 8.

[22 People v. Sanchez, 250 SCRA 14, 30 (1995).

[23 People v. Prades, 293 SCRA 411, 430 (1998).

[24 Ibid .

[25 People v. Estares, 282 SCRA 524, 535 (1997).

[26 People v. Prades, supra; People v Caballes, 274 SCRA 83, 100 (1997).

[27 People v. Poado, 311 SCRA 529, 546 (1999).




























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