G.R. No. 105378 June 27, 1994
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Edgar Sadang, Arnulfo Sayo, and Leodigario Espinar, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On September 28, 1989, at night, in Barangay 14, Bacarra, Ilocos Norte, accused Edgar Sadang, Arnulfo Sayo, Leodigario Espinar, and Joel Maligsay, armed with firearms, a hand grenade, and a balisong knife, entered the house where private complainants Eugenia Galapon, her daughter Marilyn Fermina Galapon, and Marilyn’s common-law husband Dominador Acob were staying. The accused, pretending to be NPA members, robbed the house of various items including jewelry, watches, a camera, a Betamax set, a chainsaw, firearms, and cash, with a total value of P102,805.00. During the robbery, accused Edgar Sadang and Arnulfo Sayo took turns in forcibly having sexual intercourse with Marilyn Fermina Galapon against her will. The victims initially did not report the incident due to threats. The accused were later identified by the complainants. The Regional Trial Court convicted all accused of robbery with rape and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, ordering them to indemnify the victims. Arnulfo Sayo’s appeal was dismissed for failure to file a brief. Edgar Sadang and Leodigario Espinar appealed, assigning errors regarding the credibility of witnesses, identification, proof of rape, and the strength of the prosecution’s evidence.

ISSUE

The main issues are whether the trial court erred in: 1) giving weight to the testimonies of prosecution witnesses; 2) not disregarding the identification of accused-appellant Edgar Sadang; 3) concluding that Marilyn Galapon was sexually assaulted despite lack of tenacious resistance and medical examination; 4) not giving exculpatory weight to the defense of alibi; and 5) convicting the accused-appellants despite the prosecution’s alleged failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The guilt of the accused-appellants for the crime of robbery with rape was proved beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were credible and consistent. The positive identification of the appellants by the victims prevailed over their defenses of denial and alibi. The court held that tenacious resistance is not required to prove rape when intimidation is present, and the failure to undergo a medical examination does not negate rape. The defense of alibi cannot stand against positive identification. The court modified the indemnity awarded to the rape victim, Marilyn Galapon, increasing it to P50,000.00 in line with recent jurisprudence. The decision of the trial court was affirmed with modification.