G.R. Nos. 138445-50 April 3, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENNY CONDE Y GOTA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Benny Conde was charged with six counts of rape. The complaints alleged that on or about specified dates from October 1996 to April 19, 1997, in Cagayan de Oro City, the accused, with force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of the complainant Noveliza Radaza, then 10 years old, against her will. Upon arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty, and the cases were consolidated for trial.
The prosecution evidence established that Noveliza Radaza, born on November 6, 1986, was a neighbor of the appellant. She testified that on five separate occasions from October 1996 to February 1997, appellant called her into his house, undressed her, had sexual intercourse with her, and afterwards gave her money while warning her not to tell her parents. A sixth incident occurred on April 19, 1997, following the same pattern. On April 22, 1997, appellant again called Noveliza into his house and inserted his finger into her vagina. Her mother, Severa Radaza, upon being informed, went to appellant’s house, found Noveliza hiding under the bed, and rescued her. Noveliza was medically examined, and Dr. Maria Orfa Alonsabe found old healed vaginal lacerations consistent with penile penetration. Appellant was arrested later that day while attempting to flee.
The defense presented appellant’s denial, claiming the charges were fabricated due to a disagreement with Noveliza’s father, Paulino Radaza, over money lending and parking issues. He also testified he heard Noveliza say her father had touched her vagina.
The Regional Trial Court found appellant guilty of six counts of rape and sentenced him to six reclusion perpetuas, ordering him to indemnify Noveliza Radaza P300,000.00, pay P300,000.00 in moral damages, and pay the costs.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in giving weight and credence to the testimony of Noveliza Radaza.
2. Whether the trial court erred in finding the guilt of the appellant proven beyond reasonable doubt.
3. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused twice for the rape allegedly committed on April 19, 1997.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision in toto.
1. The trial court did not err in giving credence to Noveliza’s testimony. The determination of witness credibility lies with the trial court, which observed her deportment. Noveliza testified in a clear, candid, and straightforward manner. It is inconceivable for a 10-year-old girl to fabricate a story of defloration and undergo public trial without a sincere desire to see the culprit punished. The testimony of young rape victims is credible, especially absent a motive to testify falsely. The defense claim of resentment from Noveliza’s father is baseless, as no parent would voluntarily subject their daughter to shame without compelling reasons. Appellant’s flight upon discovery further indicated guilt.
2. The prosecution proved the elements of statutory rape beyond reasonable doubt. Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (then applicable), statutory rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under twelve years of age. The two elements are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) the woman was under 12 years old. Noveliza’s testimony and the medical findings established carnal knowledge. Her birth certificate proved she was 10 years old at the time of the incidents. Violence, intimidation, or consent are not requisites for statutory rape.
3. The trial court did not convict appellant twice for the same incident on April 19, 1997. Although two informations alleged the date April 19, 1997, the prosecution sufficiently established six distinct rape incidents occurring in October, November, and December 1996, and January, February, and April 1997. A variance of a few months between the date alleged in the information and that proved at trial is not a fatal error. The date of commission is not an essential element of rape, and the rules only require alleging a date as near as possible to the actual commission.
The penalties of six reclusion perpetuas shall be served without exceeding forty years pursuant to Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The awards of civil indemnity and moral damages were affirmed at P50,000.00 each per count, totaling P300,000.00 for civil indemnity and P300,000.00 for moral damages.