GR 111165; (July, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111165 July 17, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROGELIO MERCADO y PEDRO, REYNALDO MERCADO, RODELIO GUERRERO and GERARDO MATIENZO, accused. ROGELIO MERCADO y PEDRO, REYNALDO MERCADO and RODELIO GUERRERO, appellants.
FACTS
On the evening of October 24, 1986, 15-year-old Elizabeth Ilagan was walking home alone from a birthday party in Calamba, Laguna. Along the way, she saw accused Rodelio Guerrero walking near her. They later met accused Rogelio Mercado and Reynaldo Mercado. Rodelio Guerrero then said, “Pare, ikaw na ang bahala diyan,” after which he boxed Elizabeth three times, hitting her breast and stomach, rendering her partially unconscious and causing her to fall. Rogelio and Reynaldo held Elizabeth’s arms and legs while Rodelio removed her clothing. Rodelio then placed himself on top of her, parted her thighs, and forcibly inserted his penis into her vagina, causing her pain. Elizabeth tried to shout but lost consciousness. She regained consciousness about ten minutes later, found the accused gone, felt pain in her private part and thigh, and went home. The next day, she revealed the rape to her father. A medical examination by Dr. Solita Plastina revealed hymenal lacerations consistent with penetration. Accused Rogelio Mercado, Reynaldo Mercado, and Rodelio Guerrero were convicted of rape by the trial court and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. They appealed, challenging the credibility of the victim’s testimony and the finding of conspiracy.
ISSUE
1. Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the allegedly inconsistent testimonies of the victim, Elizabeth Ilagan.
2. Whether the trial court erred in finding that the accused conspired and mutually aided each other in committing the crime of rape.
3. Whether the trial court erred in finding all accused guilty of rape and sentencing them to reclusion perpetua.
RULING
The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s decision.
1. The alleged inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony were not material and did not impair her credibility. She positively identified the accused during her direct testimony. Her statement that she was partially, not totally, unconscious explained her ability to perceive events. The fact that her father filed the complaint and provided some details (e.g., use of a firearm, location under a star apple tree) did not create inconsistencies with her own testimony, as she was in a state of shock and the father was not an eyewitness. The Court reiterated that when a woman credibly testifies she has been raped, she says all that is necessary to constitute the crime. The absence of external marks of violence does not negate rape.
2. Conspiracy was sufficiently established by the accused’s concerted acts. There was no need for a prior agreement. The acts of Rogelio and Reynaldo in holding the victim’s arms and legs to enable Rodelio to rape her demonstrated a common criminal design and mutual aid.
3. All accused were correctly found guilty. Where conspiracy is established, the act of one is the act of all. Therefore, all conspirators are liable for the rape committed by Rodelio Guerrero. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each was proper.