G.R. No. 133904 ; October 5, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RODOLFO DELA CUESTA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Rodolfo dela Cuesta was charged with the rape of his 16-year-old stepdaughter, Cristina Gonzales, on August 10, 1996, in Bay, Laguna. The prosecution established that while the victim was alone at home, the accused ordered her siblings to leave, forcibly undressed her, threatened her with a bolo, tied her hands, and proceeded to rape her despite her pleas. The victim reported the incident to the barangay captain after her mother refused to do so. Dr. Evelyn Macapagal’s medical examination revealed that the victim’s hymen was no longer intact and her vagina admitted two fingers with ease, which was deemed not normal for her age.
The defense presented a denial and alibi, claiming the accused was working in Cavite on the date of the incident. They alleged the complaint was fabricated, instigated by officials from DSWD and Project PAG-ASA due to personal grudges against the accused. The victim’s mother and half-brother corroborated the defense, testifying that the victim was in school and the accused was at work. The trial court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt and imposed the death penalty, qualifying the crime due to the accused’s relationship as stepfather and guardian.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused of rape and in imposing the death penalty based on the qualifying circumstance of relationship.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the victim’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent with human experience. Her immediate reporting of the crime to authorities, despite her mother’s discouragement, bolstered her credibility. The medical findings, while not conclusive of rape, corroborated her account of sexual assault. The defense’s theory of fabrication was rejected for being unsupported by clear and convincing evidence; mere allegations of instigation by third parties are insufficient to overthrow the positive identification by the victim.
However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. The Information alleged the accused was the “stepfather and guardian” of the victim. The evidence proved he was the common-law spouse of the victim’s mother. A qualifying circumstance like relationship must be specifically and accurately alleged in the Information to be validly considered. Since the proven relationship (common-law spouse of the mother) differed from what was alleged (stepfather), it could not qualify the crime for the death penalty. Furthermore, no evidence was presented to substantiate the “guardian” allegation. The accused was ordered to pay the victim P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.