G.R. No. 126124 January 20, 1999
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Zaldy P. Padilla, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On April 27, 1995, around 5:00 p.m., Maria Aurora B. Bautista, a 13-year-old mental retardate, was in a citrus farm owned by a neighbor when she was accosted by accused-appellant Zaldy P. Padilla, a 26-year-old married farmhand employed by the farm owner. Armed with a scythe and a knife, Padilla forced Maria Aurora to undress, lie down on the grass, and had carnal knowledge of her against her will, saying “Kantot tayo.” Maria Aurora resisted but was overpowered. She reported the incident to her father that evening, was examined at a hospital where fresh hymenal lacerations were found, and the matter was reported to the police. An information for rape was filed against Padilla. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and, considering the attendant circumstances of use of a deadly weapon, disregard of the victim’s age, and abuse of superior strength, sentenced him to death and ordered him to pay P50,000.00 as indemnity. Accused-appellant appealed, contending that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of the victim due to her mental handicap.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of the alleged victim, Maria Aurora Bautista, despite her being a mental retardate.

RULING

No. The trial court did not err. The basic test for a witness’s qualification is whether they can perceive and make known their perception to others. A mental retardate is not automatically disqualified from testifying; admissibility depends on the ability to relate what they know coherently. The trial court found Maria Aurora’s testimony to be truthful and coherent, as demonstrated during her examination where she clearly identified the accused, described the assault, and recounted the use of a weapon and the act of sexual intercourse. Her testimony was corroborated by the medical findings of fresh hymenal lacerations. The defense’s argument that she did not put up determined resistance is immaterial, as the law does not impose a burden on the rape victim to prove resistance, especially considering her age and the intimidation from the weapon used. However, the Supreme Court modified the penalty. While the crime was proven, the information did not allege the victim’s mental retardation as a qualifying circumstance for statutory rape, and the aggravating circumstances cited by the trial court were not alleged in the information either. Therefore, the penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua. The Court affirmed the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and added an award of P50,000.00 as moral damages.