GR 133444; (February, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 133444 ; February 20, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. IÑEGO LAS PIÑAS, JR., accused-appellant.
FACTS
The accused-appellant, Iñego Las Piñas, Jr., was charged with the rape of his twelve-year-old niece, Sarah Joy Arpon, on August 19, 1994, in Tabogon, Cebu. The prosecution’s evidence established that the victim, on her way to school, was called into the accused’s house. He locked the door, removed her clothing, and performed cunnilingus on her before inserting his penis into her vagina, causing pain and bleeding. He gave her P50 and warned her not to tell anyone. The victim initially concealed the act out of fear, knowing the accused to be temperamental and violent towards his wife, but later disclosed the abuse to her mother. Medical examinations confirmed a superficial hymenal laceration.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) acquitted the accused of rape, finding insufficient proof of force or intimidation, but convicted him of child abuse under Republic Act No. 7610 . On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC, finding the accused guilty of rape through intimidation and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The CA then certified the case to the Supreme Court for final review, as the penalty imposed was reclusion perpetua.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly convicted the accused-appellant of the crime of rape.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for rape. The Court held that the element of intimidation in rape is present when it produces fear in the victim, subduing her will and compelling her to submit to the carnal acts. Intimidation is assessed relative to the victim’s age, mentality, and situation. In this case, the victim, a child of twelve, was intimidated by the accused’s moral ascendancy and influence as a relative and by her knowledge of his violent temperament, which he demonstrated by beating his wife. This fear was sufficient to paralyze her will to resist.
The Court further ruled that the victim’s credible and consistent testimony, corroborated by medical findings of a hymenal laceration, constituted proof beyond reasonable doubt. The defense of denial and alibi was weak and uncorroborated. The award of moral damages was sustained. Additionally, the Court modified the damages, awarding P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, the latter justified by the aggravating circumstance of relationship by affinity within the third civil degree, which was proven during trial.