GR 133478; (January, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. No. 133478; January 16, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SALUSTIANO CALLOS, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Salustiano Callos was charged with two counts of rape committed against his 12-year-old daughter, Lorilyn Callos, on November 17 and 29, 1994. The prosecution established that on both occasions, appellant used force, intimidation, and threats to have carnal knowledge of the victim. Lorilyn testified in detail about the incidents, describing how appellant pinned her down, inserted his penis, and threatened her not to reveal the acts. Her testimony was corroborated by the medico-legal findings of Dr. Amalia Guiruba, who documented deep lacerations consistent with penetration by an erect penis. The defense did not contest the commission of the rape but focused its appeal on challenging the imposition of the death penalty.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the death penalty was properly imposed, which hinges on whether the qualifying circumstance of the victim’s minority (being under eighteen years of age) and her relationship to the offender (as a daughter) were sufficiently alleged in the Informations and proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty for two counts of qualified rape. The Court held that the special qualifying circumstances under Republic Act No. 7659 were duly established. The Informations explicitly alleged that the victim was appellant’s 12-year-old daughter. The prosecution proved her age through her consistent testimony and the medico-legal report, which referenced her age. The relationship was admitted by appellant as her father. The Court emphasized that the age of the victim in rape cases can be proven by any credible evidence, including the victim’s own testimony, and need not be established solely by a birth certificate. The defense’s argument that the age was not sufficiently proven was therefore without merit. The Court modified the awards, increasing civil indemnity to P75,000 and awarding moral damages of P50,000 for each count. The belated attempt of appellant to change his plea to guilty after the prosecution had presented its evidence was correctly disregarded by the trial court, as a plea of guilty is only mitigating if made prior to the presentation of prosecution evidence.