G.R. Nos. 135853-54; November 22, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. OPENIANO LACISTE Y MATONDO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Two informations charged Openiano Laciste with raping his daughter, Evangeline Laciste, in May and June 1996. The prosecution evidence established that on May 21, 1996, in their shared room in Davao City, the accused pulled the 15-year-old Evangeline from bed, mauled her for refusing his sexual advances, and proceeded to rape her despite her resistance. The act was witnessed by the victim’s mother, Lydia Senia, the appellant’s common-law wife, whom he also slapped when she intervened. A subsequent rape occurred in June 1996. Evangeline later gave birth in April 1997, prompting the complaint. The defense presented a different narrative, claiming the accused witnessed Evangeline having consensual sex with another man, Ernesto Bengcas, in July 1996, which led to her pregnancy.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Laciste of rape for the May 1996 incident, imposing the death penalty, but acquitted him for the June 1996 charge due to insufficient evidence. The case is under automatic review due to the imposition of the death penalty.

ISSUE

The core issues are: (1) whether the trial court erred in crediting the prosecution’s version of events and convicting the appellant, and (2) whether the penalty of death was correctly imposed.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. On the first issue, the Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, emphasizing that the trial judge is in the best position to observe demeanor. Minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of Evangeline and her mother were deemed to enhance, not diminish, their credibility, as they are natural for a young, traumatized victim recounting a harrowing experience. The Court found the victim’s testimony to be clear, convincing, and consistent on material points. The defense’s alternative story was rejected, and the delay in reporting was explained by the appellant’s moral ascendancy and the victim’s fear and shame, which do not impair credibility.
On the second issue, the Court ruled that the death penalty could not be sustained. While the information properly alleged the qualifying circumstance of relationship (father-daughter), it failed to allege the victim’s minority (age below 18). Minority is a special qualifying circumstance that must be specifically pleaded in the information to warrant the death penalty under Republic Act No. 7659 , as it is integral to an accused’s constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. Consequently, the appellant could only be convicted of simple rape. The penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua. The awards are modified to P50,000.00 civil indemnity, P50,000.00 moral damages, and P25,000.00 exemplary damages.