G.R. No. 114849 August 24, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALVIN IGNACIO y JOCON, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On March 30, 1993, seven-year-old April Diño was asked by her grandmother to call her Aunt Marilu. As Marilu was sleeping, April knocked on her door. Accused-appellant Alvin Ignacio, who lived in the same house, suddenly pulled April into his adjacent room. He pulled down her shorts and panty, unzipped his pants, laid her on the bed, lay on top of her, and inserted his penis into her vagina. Afterward, he pulled her garments back on and warned her not to tell anyone. The following day, Marilu discovered April’s bloody underwear and confronted her. April recounted the rape. She was examined by her “father” Ferdinand and the police, who saw she was still bleeding. The NBI medico-legal officer found fresh bleeding hymenal lacerations compatible with sexual abuse. Alvin was arrested. The defense presented Alvin’s brother, Rufino Ignacio, who claimed to be April’s real father and sought to withdraw the complaint. April’s birth certificate listed her father as “unknown,” and Marilu, in rebuttal, stated her brother Ferdinand had agreed to raise April as his own. The Regional Trial Court convicted Alvin Ignacio of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay P30,000.00 in moral damages.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellant, Alvin Ignacio, is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.

RULING

Yes, the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the damages. The Court found the testimony of the seven-year-old victim, April Diño, to be credible, natural, and convincing. In statutory rape, where the victim is under twelve years of age, proof of carnal knowledge is sufficient, as the law presumes the victim incapable of consent. April’s detailed and unwavering testimony, both on direct and cross-examination, established the fact of intercourse. The defense’s claim that the complaint should be withdrawn by Rufino Ignacio, alleging he was the father, was rejected. Even assuming Rufino was the father, he could not motu proprio withdraw the complaint as it was filed by April herself with the assistance of her putative father, Ferdinand, which was sufficient to confer jurisdiction. The Court modified the award of damages, ordering accused-appellant to indemnify April Diño in the amount of P75,000.00, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, and to pay moral damages in the amount of P80,000.00. Costs were imposed against accused-appellant.