G.R. No. 133189 ; May 5, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SOLOMON PURAZO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Solomon Purazo was convicted by the trial court of raping his twelve-year-old daughter, Rowena, and was sentenced to death. The prosecution evidence established that the sexual abuse began when Rowena was seven, with Solomon initially inserting his finger into her vagina and later his penis. The assaults occurred repeatedly, often when he was drunk or under the influence of drugs. Rowena disclosed the abuse to her stepmother and aunt, but no action was taken. The final incident occurred in April 1997 when Solomon brought her to a secluded seashore area and raped her.
The case came to light after a separate incident on May 8, 1997, where Solomon physically assaulted Rowena for allegedly defaming him. She escaped, reported the mauling to barangay officials, and subsequently revealed the history of rape. Medical examination revealed an intact but elastic hymen, with the examining physician opining that penetration was still possible. A complaint for rape was filed, specifically citing an incident in March 1997.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the guilt of Solomon Purazo for the crime of rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the testimony of Rowena to be credible, consistent, and candid. In rape cases, the victim’s testimony, if credible, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. The Court dismissed the defense’s attempt to capitalize on the medical finding of an intact hymen, ruling that an intact hymen does not negate rape, as complete penetration of the female organ is not required; mere entry of the male organ within the labia majora constitutes consummated rape. The medical opinion that penetration was possible given the hymen’s elasticity corroborated Rowena’s account.
However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. The information alleged the rape occurred “sometime in March 1997,” which the Court construed as charging a single specific act. For the death penalty to be imposed under the law for incestuous rape, the victim must be under eighteen and the rape must be qualified by circumstances like the victim’s minority and relationship, which were present. Yet, the information failed to allege with certainty that the rape occurred before Rowena’s twelfth birthday on May 7, 1997, a critical detail necessary to impose the death penalty as the victim’s age at the time of the crime is a qualifying circumstance that must be specifically pleaded. This failure constituted a sufficient doubt to preclude the supreme penalty. The Court affirmed the award of civil indemnity and moral damages.