G.R. No. 134486; November 16, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CLEMENTE DAYNA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Clemente Dayna, was charged with the rape of his 15-year-old niece, Evelyn Elema, allegedly committed on December 21, 1994, in Piñan, Zamboanga del Norte. The Information alleged that he used a hunting knife, force, and intimidation to have carnal knowledge of the victim against her will. During trial, Evelyn testified that Dayna, armed with a knife, forced her upstairs and had sexual intercourse with her. However, on cross-examination, she stated her private part was hit with an umbrella and that her aunt and DSWD personnel told her to testify she was raped. The medico-legal examination revealed her hymen was intact, though the labia showed reddish discoloration possibly consistent with intercourse or contact with a hard object like an umbrella handle.
The defense presented Dayna, who denied the rape. He admitted hitting Evelyn’s private part with an umbrella handle because he suspected her of stealing his money. He claimed the complaint was fabricated due to his wife’s anger over his paramour. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty of rape and imposed the death penalty, appreciating the aggravating circumstance of relationship.

ISSUE

The core issues are: (1) whether the guilt of the accused for rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and (2) whether the imposition of the death penalty was proper.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. On the first issue, the Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the victim’s credibility. The apparent inconsistencies in her testimony were satisfactorily clarified; the umbrella incident was separate from the rape. The Court reiterated that an intact hymen does not negate rape, as full penetration is not required, and medical findings are merely corroborative. The victim’s candid and consistent narration of the sexual assault, despite rigorous cross-examination, carried more weight than the accused’s denial and imputation of ill motive.
On the second issue, the Court ruled the imposition of the death penalty was erroneous. While the rape was committed with the use of a deadly weapon (a circumstance alleged in the Information), the applicable penalty under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 7659, is reclusion perpetua to death. Under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code, when no other mitigating or aggravating circumstances are present, the lesser penalty (reclusion perpetua) shall be applied. The relationship, though proven, was not alleged in the Information and thus could not be validly appreciated to qualify the crime for the death penalty. Consequently, the penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua. The awards for damages were also modified, increasing civil indemnity to P50,000 and awarding P50,000 as moral damages and P25,000 as exemplary damages.