G.R. No. 122770 January 16, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDUARDO AGBAYANI y MENDOZA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Eduardo Agbayani was charged with the rape of his 14-year-old daughter, Eden Agbayani, on July 19, 1994, in their rented room in Quezon City. The prosecution’s evidence showed that Eduardo, recently released from jail on July 13, 1994, after a prior provisional dismissal of a rape case filed by his other daughters, was living with four of his daughters. On the night of July 19, Eden was sleeping on the floor when she was awakened by her father caressing her breasts and vagina. He threatened to kill her, undressed her and himself, and succeeded in having carnal knowledge with her while she cried helplessly. She reported the incident to her elder sister, Fedelina, the next day. After attempts to report to a Bulacan fiscal, Eduardo was arrested on September 9, 1994. Eden was medically examined, and a medico-legal report was prepared. During the trial, Eden and Fedelina executed an affidavit of desistance, claiming the case arose from a family misunderstanding. Eden later retracted this affidavit in court, stating she signed it under coercion from her mother and sister. The trial court found her initial testimony credible and convicted Eduardo Agbayani of rape, imposing the death penalty.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the guilt of the accused-appellant, Eduardo Agbayani, for the crime of rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the testimony of the complainant, Eden Agbayani, to be credible, coherent, candid, and responsive. It held that her retraction of the affidavit of desistance was justified, as it was procured under pressure from her family. The defense of alibi and denial presented by the appellant was deemed weak and self-serving, and could not prevail over the positive identification and credible testimony of the victim. The Court ruled that the crime of rape was committed with the use of force and intimidation, amplified by the moral ascendancy of a father over his daughter. However, the Supreme Court modified the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua because the information did not allege the qualifying circumstance of the victim’s minority (being under eighteen years of age) and the accused’s relationship (as father) with sufficient specificity to warrant the death penalty under Republic Act No. 7659. The Court ordered the accused to pay the victim P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.