G.R. No. 130591 November 17, 1999
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARMELO LACABA @ MELOY, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Carmelo Lacaba was charged with two counts of rape against his niece, Beverly Lacaba, a 24-year-old paraplegic suffering from congenital spastic paralysis. The first incident allegedly occurred in February 1995, and the second on March 15, 1996, at their family home in Loon, Bohol. The prosecution’s case, based primarily on Beverly’s testimony, detailed that on both occasions, the accused-appellant, taking advantage of the absence of her grandparents, poked a knife at her, forced her to bend over, and succeeded in having carnal knowledge. Beverly immediately reported the second incident to her grandmother, Crispina Lacaba, who then brought her to a relative’s house and reported the crime to the police.
The defense interposed denial and alibi. Accused-appellant claimed he was arrested in September 1996 based on the 1995 complaint but was released due to lack of evidence. He alleged that the March 1996 complaint stemmed from an altercation after he scolded and whipped Beverly for disarranging his belongings, implying her testimony was motivated by revenge. The trial court convicted Lacaba of two counts of rape and imposed the death penalty for each, alongside civil indemnity.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of two counts of rape based on the credibility of the victim’s testimony and in imposing the death penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Beverly’s credibility, finding her testimony to be credible, natural, and convincing. It ruled that her physical handicap made her more vulnerable and less likely to concoct a story of incestuous rape, especially against a close relative. The defense of denial, being inherently weak, could not prevail over her positive and categorical identification. The Court found the elements of rape, including carnal knowledge through force and intimidation with the use of a deadly weapon, proven beyond reasonable doubt for both counts.
However, the Court modified the penalty. While the use of a deadly weapon was proven, it was not expressly alleged in the complaints. Under the applicable law at the time (Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 7659), the penalty for rape with a deadly weapon is reclusion perpetua to death. In the absence of any aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count was properly imposed. The Court clarified that R.A. 8353 (The Anti-Rape Law of 1997), which prescribes death when the offender knows of the victim’s physical handicap, could not be applied retroactively. The Court also increased the awards for damages accordingly.