G.R. No. 129112 July 23, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JIMMY MIJANO y TAMORA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Jimmy Mijano, was charged with the statutory rape of five-year-old Hazel Ramirez on May 10, 1996, in Las Piñas. The prosecution established that the child was found in a grassy area, pale and with her vagina profusely bleeding, after being taken by the accused. Hazel herself, in court, confirmed that Mijano inserted his penis into her vagina. Her mother, Dina Ramirez, and a neighbor, Arnulfo Valiente, corroborated the events leading to the discovery of the injured victim. The medico-legal findings supported the allegation of sexual abuse.
The defense consisted solely of Mijano’s testimony. He claimed he was at home having a drinking session with unnamed friends during the afternoon in question and was later arrested without knowing the reason, attributing his lack of recollection to being too drunk. The trial court found his denial and alibi unworthy of credit, noting the weakness of his claims compared to the consistent and credible testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. He was convicted and sentenced to death, prompting this automatic review.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court erred in finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of statutory rape, particularly in crediting the testimony of a five-year-old child witness and in imposing the death penalty despite the accused’s personal circumstances of poverty and lack of education.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty. On the issue of credibility, the Court held that the testimony of the child victim was credible and sufficient for conviction. It emphasized that in rape cases, the complainant’s testimony must be scrutinized with caution but can sustain a conviction if credible and consistent. Hazel’s clear identification of the accused and the act, corroborated by physical evidence and witness accounts, established moral certainty of guilt. The Court rejected the argument that her youth invalidated her testimony, noting that a child’s simplicity can even bolster credibility.
Regarding the penalty, the Court ruled that the personal circumstances of the accused—being poor, uneducated, jobless, and lacking religious instruction—do not exempt him from the death penalty prescribed by law for rape committed against a child below seven years old. The law makes no such distinctions, and to hold otherwise would promote inequality. The death penalty under Republic Act No. 7659 was applied, with the Court noting that while four Justices maintained their view against its constitutionality, they submitted to the majority ruling. The civil indemnity was modified to P75,000.00, with additional awards of P50,000.00 as moral damages and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages. The records were ordered forwarded to the Office of the President for possible clemency.