G.R. No. 124441 October 7, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARLOS VILLAMOR, accused-appellant.

FACTS

In an information dated December 23, 1993, accused Carlos Villamor was charged with Multiple Rape allegedly committed from September 1989 to October 1993 in Barangay Marintoc, Mobo, Masbate. The complainant was his niece, Efegin Villamor, who was nine years old at the time of the first assault. The prosecution evidence relied heavily on Efegin’s testimony, stating that in September 1989, while she was sleeping, the accused, armed with a bolo, removed her underwear, punched and strangled her when she resisted, and consummated the rape. He threatened her not to report the incident. This abuse allegedly continued for four years, occurring about ten times, until October 30, 1993. In November 1993, she reported the incidents to Donna Thelma Bongais, who then reported to the DSWD. A medical examination revealed old-healed hymenal lacerations and a positive pregnancy test. Efegin gave birth on July 2, 1994. The accused denied the charges, claiming the complaint was fabricated due to Efegin’s hostility from his objections to her relationship with his son Danilo, and upon inducement by Bongais due to a prior quarrel. The trial court convicted the accused of ten counts of rape, sentencing him to ten penalties of reclusion perpetua, ordering him to indemnify the complainant P500,000.00, and to support the offspring.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ten (10) counts of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s judgment with MODIFICATION. The appeal was found to be without merit. The Court addressed the defect in the information, which failed to state the complainant’s age, by noting that the crime occurred prior to R.A. No. 7659, so the penalty remained reclusion perpetua regardless of whether under paragraph 1 (force/intimidation) or paragraph 3 (statutory) of Article 335. The defect was cured by evidence presented at trial without objection, and the accused was sufficiently informed of the charge. On the substantive issue, the Court found the complainant’s testimony credible, straightforward, and convincing. The delay in reporting was justified by her minority, dependence on the accused, and threats. The failure to recall specific dates was immaterial. The defense of fabrication was rejected as inconceivable; no young Filipina would admit rape unless true. The theory that the accused’s son was responsible was deemed unbelievable given their young ages. The Court modified the award, ordering the accused to pay an additional P100,000.00 as moral damages, for a total of P600,000.00.