GR 118077; (November, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 118077 November 21, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DOMINADOR A. CABALUNA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
The prosecution’s evidence established that on February 14, 1992, in Davao City, the accused-appellant, Dominador Cabaluna, took advantage of the private complainant, Leticia Abenion, a teenage household helper in his home. Learning she had a fever and headache, he gave her capsules he represented as medicine. After inducing her to leave the house on the pretext of a medical check-up, he gave her more capsules during the journey. Leticia lost consciousness on a jeepney. She awoke the next morning naked in a lodge, with the appellant barely clothed beside her. She discovered blood from her private part, dressed hurriedly, resisted further advances, and fled. A medical examination later confirmed a fresh laceration on her hymen.
The defense presented a contradictory narrative, claiming that he and Leticia were “sweethearts” and that their stay at the lodge on the said date was consensual. He asserted their relationship began in December 1991 and that the accusation arose only after his wife discovered them together days later, causing a quarrel.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-appellant committed rape by having carnal knowledge of the complainant without her consent, specifically by rendering her unconscious.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of credibility, which found the complainant’s testimony to be clear, consistent, and credible. Her account of being administered substances leading to unconsciousness, her shock upon waking in the lodge, her physical state, and her immediate flight were deemed natural and convincing. The medical certificate corroborated her claim of recent sexual intercourse and defloration. In contrast, the appellant’s claim of a sweetheart relationship was uncorroborated, self-serving, and inherently improbable given the circumstances, including the complainant’s role as a household helper and her immediate distress. The Court found no reason to deviate from the trial court’s findings, as it was in the best position to evaluate witness demeanor. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was sustained. Conformably with prevailing jurisprudence, the indemnity was correctly awarded, and moral damages were increased to P50,000.00 considering the victim’s age and the trauma inflicted.