G.R. No. 128085-87; April 12, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENJAMIN RAZONABLE, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Benjamin Razonable was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of three counts of rape committed against his daughter, Maria Fe Razonable, then 12 years old. The Informations alleged the crimes occurred “sometime in the year 1987” in their dwelling in Daet, Camarines Norte. The prosecution evidence established that in mid-June 1987, appellant raped Maria Fe on three separate nights. He used force, covered her mouth, and threatened to kill her if she reported the acts. The victim disclosed the rapes to her elder sister only in 1993 due to fear and a troubled conscience, leading to a medical examination which revealed incompletely healed hymenal lacerations.
The defense relied on denial and alibi, claiming appellant was working at a bakery during the alleged incidents. Appellant also alleged the complaints were motivated by his disciplinary actions against his children. A witness for the defense testified that the victim attempted to execute an affidavit of desistance, which she refuted.

ISSUE

The issues are: (1) whether the Informations were fatally defective for stating “sometime in the year 1987” as the date of commission, and (2) whether the prosecution proved appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modification on damages. On the first issue, the Court ruled the Informations were not fatally defective. While the Rules require stating the approximate time of commission, the phrase “sometime in the year 1987” substantially complies, especially where the exact dates cannot be precisely determined. The appellant was not deprived of his constitutional right to be informed of the charge, as the specific acts and essential elements of rape were clearly alleged. The variance did not prejudice his defense, as he invoked alibi, which requires proof of physical impossibility to be at the crime scene—a burden he failed to discharge.
On the second issue, the Court found the prosecution evidence sufficient. The victim’s credible and categorical testimony, corroborated by medical findings, established the rapes. The delay in reporting was satisfactorily explained by her young age, continuous threats from her father, and the moral ascendancy he held. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect. The defense of denial and alibi, being weak, cannot prevail over positive identification. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count was affirmed. The Court modified the damages, awarding P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages for each count of rape.