GR 134288; (January, 2002) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 134288-89; January 15, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MELCHOR ESTOMACA y GARQUE, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Melchor Estomaca was charged by his daughter, Melita, with five counts of rape. He initially pleaded guilty to two counts (Criminal Cases Nos. 43568 and 43571) and not guilty to three others. The trial court convicted him, imposing reclusion perpetua for one count and death for another. On automatic review, the Supreme Court set aside the conviction and remanded the cases for further proceedings due to procedural deficiencies in how the plea of guilty was taken. Upon remand and re-arraignment, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges. The cases were jointly tried.
The prosecution evidence established that in December 1993 and on March 6, 1994, in San Joaquin, Iloilo, accused-appellant, Melita’s father, sexually assaulted her. On both occasions, he used force by boxing her in the stomach, rendering her unconscious, to accomplish the act. Melita, who was 15 years old at the time, did not immediately report the incidents due to threats against her mother and brother. A medical examination confirmed the loss of her physical virginity. The defense consisted of a blanket denial, with accused-appellant’s wife and son testifying they were unaware of the rapes until hearing a news broadcast.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant for two counts of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimony of the victim, Melita, to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. She provided a detailed and unshaken account of the sexual assaults, including the use of force through punches to her stomach. The medical findings corroborated her claim of sexual intercourse. The defense of denial cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony of the victim, especially given the moral ascendancy and influence a father holds. The relationship of father and daughter substantiates the charge of rape through moral authority and intimidation, which substitutes for the need to prove physical force beyond the act itself. The Court modified the awards of damages, increasing the civil indemnity and awarding moral and exemplary damages in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for the first count and death for the second were affirmed, with the death penalty subject to automatic review.