G.R. No. 169873 , June 8, 2007
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. NORBERTO ASTROLOGO y DE DIOS, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Norberto Astrologo, was charged with the rape of his daughter, AAA. The prosecution’s evidence established that on the night of December 28, 1999, AAA was sleeping in their Quezon City home when she was awakened by the appellant kissing her. He then opened her shirt, mashed her breasts, and pointed a knife at her when she resisted. He proceeded to have carnal knowledge of her against her will. Immediately after the incident, AAA reported the rape to a neighbor, Aida Zepadan, and then to her stepmother. They sought assistance from Barangay Security and Development Officer Mauricio Cabrera, leading to the appellant’s arrest in the early hours of December 29. A medico-legal examination conducted on AAA on the same day revealed a deep fresh hymenal laceration, which the examining physician stated was compatible with loss of virginity within 24 hours prior.
The defense consisted solely of the appellant’s denial. He testified that he fetched AAA from her grandmother’s house on December 23 because she was frequently meeting a boyfriend. He claimed that on the night in question, he was at a birthday celebration, went home around 10:30 PM, saw his daughter outside, told her to go home, and was later arrested while taking fresh air past midnight. He denied committing the crime.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s conviction of the appellant for the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court emphasized that the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight and respect. AAA’s categorical, consistent, and straightforward testimony, detailing the rape, the use of a knife, and her immediate outcry, was found credible and sufficient to prove the crime beyond reasonable doubt. Her testimony was corroborated by the medico-legal findings of a fresh hymenal injury. The defense of denial, especially when unsubstantiated, cannot prevail over the positive identification and credible testimony of the victim. The Court also noted that the relationship between the appellant and the victim, being father and daughter, lends further credence to the testimony, as it is highly improbable for a daughter to falsely accuse her father of a crime that would bring stigma to the family. The qualifying circumstance of minority was not considered due to its absence in the Information, thus the crime was simple rape punishable by reclusion perpetua. The awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages were sustained.