G.R. No. 80399 -404 November 13, 1997
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Permonette Joy Fortich and Rudy Gaid, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Permonette Joy Fortich and Rudy Gaid were each charged with two counts of forcible abduction with rape, one count of robbery with frustrated homicide, and one count of robbery. The charges stemmed from events on March 31, 1983, in Cagayan de Oro City. After attending mass, sisters Marilou and Maritess Nobleza, with friends Rolly Imperio and Luis Tumang, were at Alta Tierra Hotel. Appellants, armed with handguns, emerged, fired a shot, and identified themselves as NPA members. They ordered the sisters into the victims’ Isuzu pick-up and ordered Imperio and Tumang to strip. Gaid hit Imperio on the head with a revolver, and Fortich hit Tumang, who lost consciousness. Tumang was robbed of cash, a wristwatch, pants, and shoes. Imperio was robbed of his pants, wallet with cash, shoes, and a t-shirt. Appellants drove away with the sisters, initially heading to Acuña Beach but turned back upon seeing a military checkpoint. They proceeded to Malasag, where Gaid raped Marilou Nobleza and Fortich raped Maritess Nobleza inside the vehicle; appellants switched victims. The sisters were later left at a gasoline station, reported to the police, and underwent medical examination. Imperio and Tumang reported the robbery to the police. Appellants were later apprehended, and upon arrest, Fortich waived his constitutional rights and gave a statement admitting the crimes. The cases were consolidated and jointly tried. The trial court found appellants guilty on all counts.

ISSUE

The main issues involve the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, the validity of Fortich’s extrajudicial confession, the proper characterization and penalties for the crimes charged (specifically whether the crimes constituted separate crimes of forcible abduction and rape or the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, and the proper penalty for robbery with frustrated homicide), and the civil liabilities.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties and civil liabilities. The Court held that the testimonies of the victims were credible and consistent. Fortich’s extrajudicial confession was admissible as it was given voluntarily after a valid waiver of his rights. The Court ruled that the crimes committed were the complex crimes of forcible abduction with rape under Article 342 in relation to Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, not separate crimes. The penalty for the complex crime is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate penalty of seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as minimum to reclusion perpetua as maximum for each count of forcible abduction with rape. For robbery with frustrated homicide (Criminal Case No. 3977), the Court held that the crime was correctly complexed. The penalty under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate penalty of seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as minimum to reclusion perpetua as maximum. For simple robbery (Criminal Case No. 4162), the penalty under Article 294 is prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate penalty of four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day of prision correccional as minimum to ten (10) years of prision mayor as maximum. The Court also affirmed the award of moral damages and modified the civil indemnity for rape to P50,000.00 for each victim.