G.R. No. L-60073, September 23, 1983
The People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nenito C. Ferrer alias Chito, Rodolfo Zulueta alias Boy Negro and Nelson Maico y Hidalgo alias Dennis, Defendants-Appellants.

FACTS

Around midnight of August 15, 1979, appellants Nenito Ferrer, Rodolfo Zulueta, Nelson Maico, and an accomplice forcibly entered the Guiguinto, Bulacan residence of Teresa Estrella. Armed with a revolver and a knife, they hogtied and gagged the household members. They then robbed Teresa Estrella of cash and jewelry valued at over P176,000.00. During this criminal episode, the appellants, one after another, brought the 14-year-old daughter, Lena Estrella, to a room and raped her at gunpoint, threatening harm to her family if she resisted.
The crime was promptly reported. A medical examination of Lena Estrella revealed fresh lacerations on her hymen, corroborating her account of sexual assault. An information for the complex crime of robbery with multiple rape was filed against the appellants. Upon arraignment, after being duly apprised of the consequences, they pleaded guilty. The trial court found them guilty and imposed the death penalty, citing several aggravating circumstances.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellants of the complex crime of robbery with multiple rape and properly imposed the penalty of death.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is affirmed, but the penalty is modified. The Supreme Court upheld the finding of guilt for the complex crime of robbery with rape. The appellants’ plea of guilty, entered after a full explanation by the court, constituted a judicial confession to all elements of the crime charged. Their subsequent denial of the rape is unavailing. The testimony of the young victim, Lena Estrella, was credible, natural, and corroborated by the medical findings of fresh lacerations, which proved forcible penetration. The Court cited precedent that such physical evidence demonstrates the use of force and violence.
The imposable penalty for robbery with rape is reclusion perpetua to death. The trial court correctly appreciated the aggravating circumstances of nighttime, use of a motor vehicle, and the means employed to weaken defense (hogtying the victims), which were not offset by any mitigating circumstance. Under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code, the presence of aggravating circumstances without any mitigating circumstance would warrant the imposition of the supreme penalty of death. However, for lack of the necessary votes to impose death, the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its prerogative, commuted the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnities awarded by the trial court were sustained.