G.R. No. 98124 December 21, 1993
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Nestor Abella, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of June 15, 1990, in Cagayan de Oro City, ten-year-old Charlyn Villablanca was sent by her mother to fetch her father. On her way back alone, their neighbor, Nestor Abella, called her and ordered her to buy ice. When she initially refused, he got angry, and she agreed. After giving her fifty centavos, he called her back, grabbed her arm, and pulled her to a nearby banana grove. There, he ordered her to strip, and when she refused, he pulled down her panty, removed his shorts, and raped her, covering her mouth to prevent her from screaming. Charlyn felt pain in her vagina. Afterward, Abella put on his shorts and walked away. Charlyn’s mother, Wilma, found her crying on the way home and learned of the rape. The family reported the incident to the barangay captain and the police. Charlyn was medically examined by Dr. Apolinar A. Vacalares, who found her labia minora congested and contused but her hymen intact, and the test was negative for spermatozoa. The doctor explained the trauma could have been caused by an erect penis with superficial penetration and that semen could have dripped out. The prosecution also presented a letter dated September 23, 1990, in which Abella asked Charlyn’s parents for forgiveness. The defense presented Abella’s denial and an alibi that he was at a basketball court with friends, including Monico Dalde, who corroborated his testimony.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting Nestor Abella of rape based on the testimony of the ten-year-old complainant and the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The minor inconsistencies between the testimonies of Charlyn and her mother were deemed minor and did not impair the prosecution’s evidence. Charlyn’s positive identification of Abella as her attacker was sufficient, as they were neighbors, and she knew him by face. The letter of apology was considered as strengthening the trial court’s conviction but was not the sole basis. The intact hymen did not negate rape, as partial penetration is sufficient, and the medical findings of contusion and congestion in the labia minora supported this. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility was respected. The civil indemnity was increased to P30,000.00. The appeal was dismissed.