G.R. No. 202020; March 13, 2013
Mike Alvin Pielago y Ros, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

The petitioner, Mike Alvin Pielago, was charged and convicted for the rape by sexual assault of AAA, a four-year-old child. The prosecution evidence established that on July 1, 2006, Pielago brought AAA and her younger brother to a bedroom. While the brother played in a corner, Pielago made AAA lie down, removed her shorts, inserted his finger into her vagina, and licked it, causing her pain and bleeding. He also inserted a finger into her anus. The child later reported the assault to her mother, BBB, who noticed bloodstains on AAA’s shorts. A medico-legal examination confirmed injuries consistent with the insertion of a foreign object.
Pielago denied the allegations, claiming he was asleep at the time and attributing the accusation to a pre-existing land dispute between their families. He also suggested the bloodstain could have been from a spanking or menstrual blood from another person. The Regional Trial Court convicted Pielago of rape by sexual assault, a ruling affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Pielago’s conviction for rape by sexual assault despite the Information charging him with “acts of lasciviousness.”

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court clarified that an accused can be convicted of a crime different from that named in the Information, provided it is included in the offense charged. The legal logic hinges on the principle that what controls is not the designation of the crime but the facts alleged in the Information. The Information here contained factual averments—specifically, the insertion of a finger into the child’s vagina—that constitute the essential elements of rape by sexual assault under Article 266-A(2) of the Revised Penal Code, as the act involved the insertion of an object (a finger) into a genital orifice. Acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 is necessarily included in rape by sexual assault, as the latter requires the additional element of insertion. The variance between the crime charged and the crime proven thus did not violate Pielago’s right to be informed of the accusation, as the factual allegations in the Information sufficiently apprised him of the charge. The Court found the testimony of the child-victim credible and straightforward, and it upheld the findings of the lower courts, giving great weight to their assessment of witness credibility. Pielago’s defense of denial and alibi could not prevail over the positive identification by the victim.