G.R. No. 133888 ; March 1, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFREDO NARDO Y ROSALES, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Alfredo Nardo, was charged with the rape of his 14-year-old daughter, Lorielyn Nardo. The prosecution evidence established that on February 24, 1996, after sending his sons away, Alfredo ordered Lorielyn to get his cigarettes from his bedroom. He followed her, embraced her, mashed her breasts, and proceeded to undress and rape her despite her pleas. He threatened her with a knife, warning to kill their whole family if she reported the incident. Lorielyn’s mother later found her crying but she remained silent due to the threat. In March 1996, fearing another assault after her father whispered an intent to “play” again, Lorielyn fled to her aunt’s house. After persistent questioning, she finally revealed the rape, leading to a police report and a medical examination which indicated possible sexual intercourse.
The defense presented an alibi, claiming Alfredo was at work in a law office in Legazpi City at the time of the alleged incident. He denied the accusations, suggesting the complaint was fabricated due to family resentment over his strictness and his common-law wife’s alleged promiscuity. The trial court found the prosecution’s evidence credible and convicted Alfredo Nardo of rape, imposing the death penalty due to the qualifying circumstance of the victim being his daughter.

ISSUE

The core issue for automatic review is whether the guilt of the accused-appellant 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 the victim, Lorielyn, to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. Her detailed account of the rape, her subsequent flight, and her initial silence out of fear of her father’s threat were deemed natural and convincing. The medical findings, while not conclusive of rape, were consistent with her testimony. The defense of alibi was rightly rejected by the trial court as it was not physically impossible for the accused to have been at the crime scene, and it crumbled against the positive identification by the victim. The Court also noted that the relationship between the accused and the victim, far from being a motive for fabrication, lent credibility to the charge and explained the victim’s initial hesitation.
However, the Supreme Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. While the Information alleged that the victim was the daughter of the accused, a qualifying circumstance warranting the death penalty under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, the prosecution failed to prove the victim’s minority (below 18 years old) with the required certainty. The only evidence of age presented was a baptismal certificate, which is not the best evidence for proving age as it is not an official record of birth. The birth certificate was allegedly burned. Consequently, the twin circumstances of minority and relationship necessary for the imposition of the death penalty were not both conclusively established. The crime was thus simple rape, punishable by reclusion perpetua. The award of civil indemnity and moral damages was sustained.