G.R. No. 115657 June 26, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DOMINGO STA. ANA y TUPIG, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Domingo Sta. Ana was charged with three counts of rape committed against Judilyn Obera, a minor, on November 28, 1991, February 17, 1992, and April 22, 1992, in Kalookan City. The Informations alleged that the accused, by means of threats and intimidation with a knife, had sexual intercourse with the victim against her will. The appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented the victim, her mother (to prove age), police officers involved in the arrest and investigation, and an NBI medico-legal officer. The victim testified that on each occasion, the appellant, who was her best friend’s father, threatened her with a knife and raped her. She revealed the incidents only in July 1992 when her parents, noticing her enlarging stomach, brought her to an “albularyo” who said she was pregnant; she then gave birth on December 14, 1992. The defense presented the appellant, who denied the charges and claimed he was at his barbecue stall during the alleged incidents; a balut vendor (Beatriz Doktor) who testified the appellant was vending beside her on those dates; and the appellant’s daughter (Didel Sta. Ana), the victim’s friend. The appellant also claimed he was forced by the police to admit the crime and was maltreated. The Regional Trial Court found the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each count and to indemnify the victim P50,000.00.

ISSUE

The central issue is one of credibility: whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for three counts of rape beyond reasonable doubt, considering the conflicting versions of the prosecution and the defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the decision of the trial court with MODIFICATION. The Court found the appellant guilty of three counts of rape. The Court held that the victim’s testimony was credible, straightforward, and consistent. The Court noted that a young girl’s revelation of rape, coupled with her pregnancy, carries great weight. The defense of alibi was rejected as it was not physically impossible for the appellant to have been at the scene of the crime, given that his vending place was only about two to three minutes away from his house where the rapes allegedly occurred. The Court also found the denial of the appellant weak against the positive identification by the victim. The Court modified the penalty, stating that for each count of rape committed against a minor under twelve years of age, the penalty should be reclusion perpetua to death. Since no aggravating or mitigating circumstances were proven, the penalty for each count was imposed at reclusion perpetua. The indemnity was increased to P50,000.00 for each count of rape, and moral damages of P50,000.00 for each count were also awarded.