G.R. No. 122732 September 7, 1999
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDGAR BAYRON y MANTILLA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Edgar Bayron y Mantilla, was charged with rape. The prosecution evidence established that on January 16, 1994, at around 12:30 a.m., the complainant, a 37-year-old married woman with three children, was sleeping on a bamboo bench inside her rented stall at the Langihan public market in Butuan City. The accused-appellant, who had previously used the stall as his sleeping quarters, arrived and was surprised to find her there. He left but returned after about 30 minutes armed with a knife. He ordered her not to move and to keep quiet. When she held his wrists to parry the knife, he cut the little finger of her left hand. He then, at knife point, ordered her to unbutton her pants and proceeded to pull them down. He threatened to kill her if she did not lie down, then went on top of her and had sexual intercourse. After the act, the complainant managed to leave upon pretext of going to the toilet. She immediately ran out to seek help, reported the incident to the police, and was medically examined. The medical certificate showed a positive finding for spermatozoa, a hematoma on her neck, and a lacerated wound on her left small finger. The accused-appellant admitted to the sexual intercourse but claimed it was consensual, alleging that the complainant willingly engaged with him shortly after they met. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay moral damages.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellant is guilty of the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court with modification. The Court found the accused-appellant’s claim of consensual sex to be highly incredible and contrary to ordinary human behavior, noting that no married woman with children would simply engage in sexual intercourse with a complete stranger. The complainant’s immediate actions after the incident—running for help, reporting to the police, and submitting to a medical examination—corroborated her lack of consent. The medical findings, particularly the presence of spermatozoa and the wounds, supported the use of force or intimidation. The defense witness’s testimony regarding a later encounter between the complainant and the accused-appellant was deemed insufficient to prove consent, as it did not disclose the content of their conversation and did not negate the commission of rape. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed. In accordance with prevailing jurisprudence, the Court modified the award by ordering the accused-appellant to pay an additional P50,000.00 as indemnity to the complainant, on top of the P50,000.00 moral damages awarded by the trial court.