G.R. No. 135822; October 25, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PIO DACARA y NACIONAL, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Pio Dacara, was charged with the rape of his thirteen-year-old daughter, Ditas Dacara, on February 5, 1997, in Valenzuela, Metro Manila. The victim testified that she was awakened around 4:00 a.m. by her father touching her breasts and sex organ. He covered her mouth, removed her clothes, and succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her despite her resistance. Afterward, he threatened to kill her and her family if she reported the incident. She later disclosed the rape to her mother, leading to the filing of a complaint. A medico-legal examination confirmed her non-virgin state.
The defense interposed denial and alibi. Accused-appellant claimed he was working as a stay-in construction worker in Marilao, Bulacan, from February 3 to 17, 1997, and never returned to Valenzuela during that period. He presented witnesses to corroborate his presence in Bulacan. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and imposed the death penalty, citing the qualifying circumstance of relationship and the victim’s minority.

ISSUE

The core issues were: (1) whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, and (2) whether the imposition of the death penalty was proper given the allegations in the complaint.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. On the first issue, the Court found the victim’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. The minor inconsistencies cited by the defense regarding the time of the rape and the date of disclosure to her mother were deemed trivial and even bolstered the testimony’s spontaneity. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court emphasized that testimonies of child victims are given full weight.
On the second issue, the Court ruled the death penalty was improperly imposed. While the victim was a minor and the offender was her parent, qualifying the rape for the death penalty under Republic Act No. 7659, the information failed to allege the qualifying circumstance of relationship with the requisite specificity. The complaint merely stated the accused’s name without expressly alleging he was the victim’s father. Following the rules on criminal procedure and the constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation, such a vital qualifying circumstance must be specifically alleged to warrant the supreme penalty. Consequently, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The Court also increased the civil indemnity to P50,000 and awarded moral damages of P50,000 and exemplary damages of P25,000.