Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

G.R. No. 186383 (People of the Philippines v. Eduardo A. Enriquez). - We resolve the appeal, filed by Eduardo Enriquez (appellant), from the decision^[1] of the Court of Appeals (CA) dated June 6, 2008 in CA- G.R. CR-HC No. 01977. The CA decision affirmed with modification the October 17, 2003 joint decision^[2] of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 172, Valenzuela City, finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of one (1) count of acts of lasciviousness^[3]  and two (2) counts of rape.^[4]

The RTC Ruling 

In its October 17, 2003 joint decision, the RTC convicted the appellant of one (1) count of acts of lasciviousness and two (2) counts of rape. It based the conviction on the testimony of the victim, AAA,^[5] that the appellant placed his finger inside her private parts in May 1995, and that he inserted his penis into her vagina in June and August 1999. It held that it was inconceivable for a young woman to weave a tale of repeated ravishment against her own father, and subject herself and her family to humiliation and scandal if she had not been truly sexually abused. It also rejected the appellant's alibi that he was not in the Philippines on the date the rapes happened, as the certification issued by the Bureau of Immigration showed that he was in the country in June and August 1999.

For the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the RTC sentenced the appellant to suffer the indeterminate penalty of thirteen (13) years, nine (9) months and eleven (11) days of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to sixteen (16) years, five (5) months, and ten (10) days of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and ordered him to pay the victim P50,000.00 as moral damages. The RTC also sentenced the appellant to suffer the death penalty, and to pay the victim the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages, for each count of rape.

The CA Decision 

On intermediate appellate review, the CA modified the RTC joint decision. For the crime of rape, the CA reduced the death penalty to reclusion perpetua; increased the amount of moral damages from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 for each count; and further ordered the appellant to pay the victim P25,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count. For the crime of acts of lasciviousness, it reduced the penalty to six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to six (6) years of prision correccional, as maximum. It also ordered him to further pay the victim P30,000.00 as civil indemnity.

The CA held that all the elements of the crimes of rape and acts of lasciviousness had been established. It gave credence to AAA's testimony that the appellant placed his finger inside her vagina in May 1995, and inserted his penis into her private parts in June and August 1999. It added that the appellant's constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him was not violated, because the precise date and time of the commission of the crime is not a material element of the crimes of rape and acts of lasciviousness.

Our Ruling 

We dismiss the appeal but modify the designation of the crime committed, the penalty imposed, and the amount of the awarded indemnities in Criminal Case No. 793-V-00 and Criminal Case No. 795-V-00 (rape). We likewise modify the penalty imposed and the amount of the awarded indemnities in Criminal Case No. 796-V-00 (acts of lasciviousness).

We find no reason to disturb the factual findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. The testimony of AAA that the appellant placed his finger inside her vagina in May 1995, and inserted his penis into her private parts in June and August 1999 is worthy of belief as it was a clear and straightforward account consistent with the findings of Dr. Evelyn Ignacio. We reject the appellant's argument that the informations against him are defective for failing to state the precise dates of the commission of the crimes. The exact date of the commission of the offense is not an essential element of the crimes of acts of lasciviousness and rape. Section 11, Rule 110 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure states that an information is sufficient as long as it alleges that the offense was committed at "any time as near to the actual date at which the offense was committed." At any rate, the appellant is deemed to have waived objection to any formal defect in the Information for failing to file either a motion to quash or a motion for a bill of particulars before his arraignment.

We find unmeritorious the appellant's defense that he was not in the Philippines on the date of the incidents. As the lower courts found, the appellant was in the country on the dates of the sexual abuses. We likewise reject the appellant's claim that AAA fabricated the charges of sexual abuses because he scolded and whipped her for always coming home late. As the trial court correctly observed, a daughter would not concoct a story of defloration against her own father, undergo medical examination, and subject herself to the stigma and embarrassment of a public trial if her motive was other than a fervent desire to seek justice.^[6] 

We modify the designation of the crime committed in Criminal Case No. 793-V-00 and Criminal Case No. 795-V-00 from simple rape to qualified rape. The evidence showed that AAA was 13 years old when she was raped on two occasions in 1999, as evidenced by her Certificate of Live Birth showing that she was born on June 9, 1986. The evidence also established that the appellant is the victim's father. Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, the death penalty shall be imposed when the victim is below 18 years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. Nonetheless, we cannot impose the death penalty in view of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9346, entitled "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines." Pursuant to this law, we affirm the CA's reduction of the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua for each count of rape, with the modification, however, that the appellant shall not be eligible for parole. We also increase the awarded civil indemnity and exemplary damages to P75,000.00 and P30,000.00, respectively, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.^[7] 

For the crime of acts of lasciviousness (Criminal Case No. 796-V-00), we increase the penalty imposed from six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to six (6) years of prision correccional, as maximum, to an indeterminate penalty of twelve (3 2) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 17 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The prosecution established that AAA was only nine (9) years old when the incident happened in May 1995. Section 5(b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610 (the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) states that the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under 12 years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period. Corollary, Section 31(c), Article XII of R.A. No. 7610 expressly provides that "[t]he penalty provided herein shall be imposed in its maximum period when the perpetrator is an ascendant, parent, guardian, stepparent or collateral relative within the second degree of consanguinity or affinity." Hence, the maximum period of reclusion temporal medium should be imposed. Applying the provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum of the penalty to be imposed should be reclusion temporal minimum.^[8]  cralaw

We also reduce the amount of the awarded civil indemnity from P30,000.00 to P20,000.00 and moral damages from P50,000.00 to P15,000.00, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.^[9] We additionally award P15,000.00 as exemplary damages in view of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of relationship.

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals dated June 6, 2008 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01977 is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: 

I. In Criminal Case No. 793-V-00 and Criminal Case No. 795-V-00 for two counts of Rape

(a) appellant Eduardo Enriquez is found guilty of two counts of qualified rape; (b) he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole; (c) the amount of civil indemnity is increased  from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00; and (d) the amount of exemplary damages is increased from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00.

II. In Criminal Case No. 796-V-00 for Acts of Lasciviousness

(a) the penalty imposed on the appellant is increased  from six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to six (6) years of prision correccional, as maximum, to twelve (12) years and one (3) day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 17 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum; (b) the amount of civil indemnity is reduced from P30,000.00 to P20,000.00; (c) the amount of moral damages is reduced from P50,000.00 to P15,000.00; and (d) the appellant is further ordered to pay  AAA the amount of P15,000.00 as exemplary damages.

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] Rollo, pp. 4-18; penned by Associate Justice Sixto C. Marella, Jr., and concurred in by Associate Justices Edgardo F. Sundiam and Monina Arevalo-Zenarosa.

^[2] CA rollo, pp. 24-34. 

^[3] Docketed as Criminal Case No. 796-V-00. 

^[4] Docketed as Criminal Cases No. 793-V-00 and No. 795-V-00. 

^[5] See People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, 502 SCRA 419. 

^[6] See People v. Nazareno, G.R No. 167756, April 9, 2008, 551 SCRA 16, 41. 

^[7] See People of the Philippines v. Benjamin Padilla y Untalan, G.R. No. 182917, June 8, 2011; and People of the Philippines v. Edgardo Ogarte y Ocob, G.R. No. 182690, May 30, 2011. 

^[8] See People v. Velasquez, 405 Phil. 74 (2001). 

^[9] See People of the Philippines v. Ernesto Fragante y Ayuda, G.R. No. 182521, February 9, 2011; and Salvador Flordeliz y Abenojar v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 186441, March 3, 2010. 

^[*] Reyes, J., on leave; Del Castillo, J., designated as Acting Member per Special Order No. 1077 dated September 12, 2011.