G.R. No. 129236 ; October 17, 2001
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAYMUNDO DIZON Y GAROTA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Raymundo Dizon, was convicted of rape and sentenced to death by the Regional Trial Court. The information alleged that from mid-1994 to October 1995, he had carnal knowledge of the complainant, Betty Vergara, then 13 years old, through force and intimidation, resulting in her pregnancy. The prosecution presented Betty, her mother Lorna, and Dr. Arnold Anceno. Betty testified that Dizon, her mother’s live-in partner, first attempted abuse in 1988 and succeeded in raping her multiple times starting July 1994 in the bathroom of their house, using threats to kill her family to ensure her silence. Her pregnancy was discovered in April 1996, leading to the police report and medical examination confirming healed hymenal lacerations and a 5-6 month pregnancy. She gave birth in July 1996.
The defense consisted of denial and alibi. Dizon denied the accusations, claiming the alleged locations were too public and the bathroom too small. He suggested the charge was fabricated because he had scolded Betty for having a boyfriend. His sister and neighbors testified to his good character and the improbability of the crime occurring unnoticed.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found Betty’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect. Her detailed account of the rape, including the specific location and the use of threats, was unshaken. Her failure to immediately report was reasonably explained by the accused’s threats against her family, a common reaction in rape cases, especially when the offender is a person of authority in the home. Her subsequent conduct, immediately reporting upon confirmation of her pregnancy, bolstered her credibility.
The defense of denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The claim of a motive to fabricate was weak and unsupported. However, the Court found the qualifying circumstance of the victim being under eighteen and the offender being the common-law spouse of the victim’s parent was not sufficiently alleged in the information. The information failed to state that Dizon was the common-law spouse of the victim’s parent at the time of the rape, a requisite for imposing the death penalty under Republic Act No. 7659 . Consequently, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The award of civil indemnity and moral damages was affirmed.