G.R. No. 130784 October 13, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RODRIGO LOTEYRO AGUINALDO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Rodrigo Loteyro Aguinaldo was charged with the rape of his 17-year-old daughter, Jeannette Aguinaldo y Yap, on or about June 24, 1995, in Manila. The information alleged he used force, violence, and intimidation by pointing a pointed object at her side and threatening to kill her. Appellant, the complainant’s father, pleaded not guilty. During trial, the complainant initially hesitated to testify in her father’s presence. After he left the courtroom, the prosecution adopted her sworn statement as her direct testimony, wherein she narrated being forced to have sexual intercourse. Later, she was recalled and testified that she woke up to find appellant lying beside her, touching her breast and private part. She woke again to find him licking her face. He then mounted her, threatened to kill her, and penetrated her, causing pain. Appellant was drunk that night. An NBI medico-legal examination revealed the complainant’s hymen was intact, with the doctor opining there was no complete penetration, and she had extragenital physical injuries inflicted one to two weeks prior to the February 25, 1996 examination. The defense interposed denial. Appellant claimed he slept downstairs that night and denied being drunk. He admitted beating Jeannette due to her attitude. His son testified that Jeannette was a liar. The trial court found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape and imposed the death penalty, holding that a broken hymen is not an essential element of rape and that it was unthinkable for a daughter to invent such a story against her father.

ISSUE

The central issue is whether the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, considering the complainant’s testimony and the medico-legal finding of an intact hymen.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. It held that the complainant’s testimony, particularly her detailed recollection of the rape incident when recalled to the witness stand, was credible and sufficient to prove the crime. The Court ruled that an intact hymen does not negate rape, as full penetration of the hymen is not required; entry of the labia or the mere touching of the external genitalia is sufficient. The medico-legal finding was consistent with the possibility of incomplete penetration or an elastic hymen. The Court found the complainant’s testimony credible, as it is unnatural for a daughter to accuse her father of rape unless it is true. However, the Court modified the penalty. While the crime was committed before the effectivity of Republic Act No. 8353 (The Anti-Rape Law of 1997), the applicable law was Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659 . The death penalty could not be imposed because the information failed to allege the qualifying circumstance that the victim was under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender was a parent, which is essential for the imposition of the death penalty under the said law. The information only described the victim as “a minor, 17 years of age” but did not expressly allege the accused’s relationship as parent. Consequently, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnity awarded to the victim was increased to P50,000.00.