GR 109776; (May, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 109776 May 26, 1995
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROQUE CABRESOS, accused-appellant.
FACTS
The accused-appellant, Roque Cabresos, was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of the crime of rape against his niece, Editha Pesidas. The information alleged that on June 29, 1988, at their home in Balingoan, Misamis Oriental, Cabresos, armed with a knife and by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of the 16-year-old complainant against her will. The crime was committed while the victim’s parents were away, and the accused, a cousin of the victim’s mother, was living with the family. The trial court found the testimony of the victim credible, detailing how the accused entered her room at dawn, threatened her with a knife, and succeeded in raping her. The subsequent birth of a child was presented as corroborative evidence.
The defense interposed by Cabresos was alibi. He claimed that on the night in question, he was in a different location, drinking with companions until late and then sleeping at his uncle’s house. He asserted that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime. The trial court rejected this defense, giving greater weight to the positive identification and straightforward testimony of the victim.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility, noting that her testimony was clear, convincing, and consistent on material points. The Court reiterated the doctrine that the testimony of a rape victim, if credible, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected as it was not physically impossible for the appellant to have been at the crime scene, and it cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court also found the birth of a child as a natural consequence of the rape to be a corroborating circumstance.
However, the Supreme Court corrected the trial court’s appreciation of blood relationship as an aggravating circumstance, ruling that the uncle-niece relationship is not among those enumerated in the Revised Penal Code. Nevertheless, the presence of other valid aggravating circumstances—use of a deadly weapon, abuse of confidence, and obvious ungratefulness—justified the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The awards for civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages, and the order for recognition and support of the child were affirmed.