G.R. No. 208623, July 23, 2014
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Virgilio Antonio y Rivera, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Two separate Informations for rape were filed against accused-appellant Virgilio Antonio y Rivera before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Tuguegarao City. The first (Criminal Case No. 10244) alleged that sometime in 2001, in Alcala, Cagayan, the accused, by force and intimidation, had sexual intercourse with AAA, a minor, in an uninhabited place. The second (Criminal Case No. 10245) alleged that on August 26, 2003, in the same municipality, the accused, being the guardian of AAA, a minor under his care, by force and intimidation, had sexual intercourse with her. The accused pleaded not guilty. During pre-trial, the defense admitted the accused’s identity, his relationship as AAA’s godfather, the dates and places of the alleged crimes, and AAA’s minority. The prosecution presented AAA and Dr. Rafael Sumabat. AAA testified that in April 2001, the accused, her godfather with whom she was living, brought her to his farm, threatened to kill her, and raped her. On August 26, 2003, while alone in the house with the accused, he again raped her. The incidents were revealed after a relative confronted AAA. Dr. Sumabat’s medico-legal findings indicated old hymenal lacerations. The defense consisted solely of the accused’s denial, claiming AAA only started living with them in May 2002 and that the rape charge stemmed from a family dispute after a town fiesta. The RTC convicted the accused of two counts of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each count, ordering him to pay damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the damages awarded.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of accused-appellant Virgilio Antonio y Rivera for two counts of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATION. The Court found the appeal lacking in merit. It held that the credibility of AAA, a child witness, remained intact despite minor inconsistencies, as her testimony was spontaneous and categorical. The medical findings corroborated her account. The accused’s defenses of denial and alibi were weak and could not prevail over AAA’s positive identification. The Court agreed with the CA that the qualifying circumstance of relationship (guardian) could not be appreciated as it was not alleged in the Information for Criminal Case No. 10245. However, the aggravating circumstance of the victim’s minority was properly considered. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count was affirmed. The Court modified the awards of damages, ordering the accused to pay, for each count of rape: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, with interest on all damages at 6% per annum from finality of judgment until fully paid.