GR 113483; (February, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 113483 ; February 22, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARMELO FAIGANO y GRUTAS, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
On January 6, 1993, Nely Ojina was asleep in her Quezon City home with her infant son and young niece when appellant Carmelo Faigano, a construction worker, entered. He poked a balisong at her neck, threatened to kill her and the children, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. After the act, he demanded money. Fearing for her life, Nely pointed to her closet, from which Faigano took cash and jewelry. He then fled. Nely later reported the robbery to barangay officials and identified Faigano at a nearby construction site that same morning, initially stating only that she was robbed and kissed due to shame. She later fully disclosed the rape at the police station, where a medico-legal examination was conducted. The accused denied the charges, proffering alibi.
ISSUE
The core issue is the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and the proper characterization of the crime committed—whether it constitutes the special complex crime of robbery with rape or separate offenses.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the legal characterization of the crimes. It upheld the trial court’s assessment of Nely Ojina’s credibility, rejecting the appellant’s arguments as unpersuasive. The Court found the complainant’s testimony credible, noting that the non-awakening of the children was normal given their tender age, her delayed disclosure of the rape was understandable due to the stigma attached to victims, and the appellant’s return to the vicinity did not indicate innocence. The Court, however, disagreed with the trial court’s finding of the special complex crime of robbery with rape. For this complex crime to exist, the intent to commit robbery must precede the rape. The evidence established that the rape was committed first, and the taking of property occurred only afterward as an afterthought. Consequently, the acts constitute two separate crimes: rape and robbery. Appellant is sentenced to reclusion perpetua for rape committed with a deadly weapon and an indeterminate penalty for the robbery, to be served successively. He is also ordered to pay indemnity and restitution.