GR 131167; (August, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 131167-68; August 23, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NELSON DELA CRUZ y VILLATORA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Nelson Dela Cruz was charged with two counts of rape against his minor daughters, Jardeliza (14) and Redelia (15). The separate Informations alleged specific dates: March 20, 1996 for Jardeliza and April 5, 1996 for Redelia. At trial, both complainants testified in harrowing detail. Jardeliza stated that on the specified night, her father threatened her with a knife, punched her, and succeeded in having carnal knowledge. Redelia recounted a similar ordeal on April 5, where her father used threats and physical violence. Their mother, Delia, corroborated the long-standing abuse, explaining her delayed report due to fear of the accused’s death threats. The defense was a mere denial. The trial court convicted the accused of both counts and imposed the death penalty, prompting this automatic review.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the guilt of the accused for the crime of rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and if the imposition of the death penalty was proper given the attendant circumstances.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The testimonies of the victims were found credible, consistent, and sufficient to establish the elements of rape through force and intimidation. The Court dismissed the defense of denial as inherently weak against the positive and categorical declarations of the complainants. The delay in reporting was satisfactorily explained by the daughters’ and their mother’s genuine fear for their lives, which did not impair their credibility.
Regarding the penalty, the Court applied Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 8353 . The qualifying circumstance for the imposition of the death penalty—that the victim is under eighteen and the offender is a parent—was present. However, the Court noted a fatal procedural flaw: the Informations did not allege this qualifying circumstance with the requisite specificity. While the relationship (father-daughter) and the victims’ minority were stated in the body of the Informations, they were not expressly alleged as qualifying circumstances for the purpose of elevating the penalty to death. Following the rule that the circumstances qualifying the crime and increasing the penalty to death must be specifically pleaded, the Court held that the death penalty could not be imposed. Consequently, the penalty for each count was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The awards of civil indemnity and moral damages were affirmed.