G.R. No. 137282 ; March 16, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFREDO ALIPAR Y ALINSOD, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On January 23, 1998, thirteen-year-old Twinkle Alipar was sleeping near her mother inside their house in Laguna. Her father, accused-appellant Alfredo Alipar, who was naked, sneaked beside her. He tied her hands, gagged her mouth, removed her panty, and warned her not to tell anyone. He then inserted his finger into and licked her vagina, embraced and kissed her, and finally succeeded in having carnal knowledge with her. Afterward, Twinkle freed herself, washed her sticky vagina, and reported the incident to her mother, Annalie, who confronted the appellant. Twinkle later reported the rape to her school adviser, leading to the execution of a sworn statement at the police station.
The prosecution presented Twinkle, who testified consistently on the rape and revealed two prior sexual assaults in 1997, which complaints were dismissed due to affidavits of desistance. Corroborative testimonies from teachers, a medico-legal report confirming recent hymenal lacerations, and police blotter entries were submitted. The defense consisted solely of the appellant’s denial, claiming his daughter was influenced to file the case due to hatred from being scolded. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of rape and imposed the death penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant of rape and imposing the death penalty despite alleged incredibility of the victim’s testimony and failure to prove the qualifying circumstances of filiation and minority.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The Court found Twinkle’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. The defense of denial cannot prevail over her positive identification. The claim that the rape was improbable because her mother slept nearby is untenable; rape can be committed even in crowded places, and the appellant used force by tying and gagging the victim to prevent outcry. The medico-legal findings corroborated the sexual assault.
However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. For the death penalty to be imposed under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659 , the qualifying circumstances of minority (that the victim is under eighteen) and relationship (that the offender is a parent) must be both alleged in the information and proven during trial. While filiation was sufficiently alleged and proven, the information failed to specifically allege the victim’s age as being under eighteen. It merely stated she was “13 years of age.” Jurisprudence requires that the precise age of minority (i.e., “below eighteen years of age”) be expressly stated in the information to qualify the crime for the capital offense. This technical deficiency warrants the modification of the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The awards of civil indemnity and damages were affirmed.