G.R. No. 109780 August 17, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RODOLFO BERNALDEZ @ “Dolfo,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

An information was filed charging Rodolfo Bernaldez with the rape of his 10-year-old niece, Maria Teresa Bernaldez, on the morning of August 29, 1990, in Sitio Mabatia, Barangay Sugcad, Polangui, Albay. At trial, the prosecution presented Maria Teresa and her father, Pedro Bernaldez. Maria Teresa testified that on August 29, 1990, her uncle carried her upstairs, removed her clothes, laid on top of her, inserted his penis into her vagina, and made push and pull movements until a sticky, warm substance came out. He then gave her P5.00 and threatened to kill her parents and siblings if she told anyone. She also revealed that he had been abusing her for the past five years. The incident was disclosed the next day, August 30, when Maria Teresa refused her father’s order to borrow money from the accused, leading her father to beat her. Pedro Bernaldez then reported the matter to the police. A medical certificate issued by Dr. Nancy de la Paz indicated old lacerations at 3:00 and 9:00 o’clock and newly-healed lacerations at 11:00 o’clock on the hymen. The defense presented alibi. Rodolfo Bernaldez claimed he was working at a rice mill from 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on August 29. Defense witness Melita Sasota, Maria Teresa’s teacher, testified that Maria Teresa was present in school the whole day of August 29. The trial court convicted Rodolfo Bernaldez of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay P50,000 in moral and exemplary damages.

ISSUE

The main issues are: (1) whether the accused was convicted of multiple rape or a single rape incident as charged; (2) whether the specific date of the offense’s commission was material; (3) whether the accused’s guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt despite his alibi and the teacher’s testimony on the victim’s school attendance; and (4) the admissibility and weight of the medical certificate without the doctor’s testimony.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The accused was convicted only of the single rape incident on August 29, 1990, as charged in the information, not of multiple rape. The specific date is not an essential element of the crime of rape; a mistake in the date is not fatal as long as the offense is proven to have occurred and the accused is identified as the perpetrator. The positive and credible testimony of the child victim, who identified her uncle as the rapist, prevails over the accused’s alibi and the teacher’s testimony, which did not conclusively prove the victim’s whereabouts during the entire day of the alleged rape. The medical certificate, being a public document, was admissible as evidence of the victim’s physical condition, and its findings corroborated the fact of sexual intercourse. The defense’s imputation of ill motive on the part of the victim and her father was unsupported. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of P50,000 as civil indemnity were upheld.