GR 132127; (March, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 132127-29; March 31, 2004
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. RONIE GABELINIO, Appellant.
FACTS
The appellant, Ronie Gabelinio, was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of three counts of rape against Susan Precioso. The prosecution evidence established that on October 31, November 1, and November 20, 1996, Gabelinio, while armed with a revolver in two instances, sexually assaulted Susan at the eatery where they both worked. He used force, intimidation, and threats against her life and family. Susan reported the incidents, and medical examination confirmed recent hymenal lacerations consistent with sexual intercourse, and a psychiatrist diagnosed her with major depression.
The defense interposed denial and the claim of a sweetheart relationship. Gabelinio testified that the sexual encounters were consensual and alleged that Susan’s mother attempted to extort money from him. He also presented an alibi, stating he was on leave for a training course during some of the alleged dates and worked night shifts.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimony of the victim to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. It held that when a victim’s testimony is credible, it is sufficient to sustain a conviction for rape. The medical findings corroborated her account of forcible defloration. The Court rejected the defense of a sweetheart relationship, noting the absence of any corroborative evidence like love letters or photographs, and found the claim of extortion to be an unsubstantiated afterthought.
Regarding the alibi, the Court ruled it was inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The training course he attended did not preclude his presence at the crime scene, as it was held within the same city. The Court modified the damages awarded, upholding the civil indemnity and adding moral damages for each count. Exemplary damages were also awarded for the two counts where the use of a deadly weapon was both alleged and proven, as this constituted an aggravating circumstance.