G.R. No. 137341 ; October 28, 2002
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Samuel B. Buada, Benigno V. Villanueva and Dennis Verceles, accused, Benigno V. Villanueva, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused Samuel B. Buada, Dennis F. Verceles, and Benigno V. Villanueva were charged with the rape of Marianne Pinky Limson, a 12-year-old minor, on or about May 15, 1998, in Bayambang, Pangasinan. The information alleged they conspired and used force and intimidation to have sexual intercourse with her against her will. Buada and Verceles initially pleaded not guilty but later changed their plea to guilty. Trial proceeded only for appellant Benigno V. Villanueva. The prosecution’s version established that on May 15, 1998, the victim went to visit a friend but could not find the house. While waiting for a ride, she was approached by Verceles, who said appellant wanted to talk to her. She was then forcibly brought by Verceles, Villanueva, Buada, and an unidentified man into the Bani Elementary School, compelled to drink gin, and, after becoming tipsy, was raped by all four men. She fell asleep and was awakened at 3:30 A.M. the next day by Villanueva and Buada, who raped her again. She walked home, and her parents noticed she was weak, fearful, and had bloodstained pants. A medical examination revealed lacerations, bleeding, and a positive sperm smear test. Appellant denied the rape, claiming the victim willingly joined their drinking session and that only Buada and Verceles had sex with her, while he remained outside. The trial court convicted all three accused. Buada and Verceles, as youthful offenders, had their sentences suspended. Appellant Villanueva was sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to indemnify the victim P50,000.

ISSUE

Whether appellant Benigno V. Villanueva’s guilt for the crime of rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found that the victim positively and categorically identified appellant as one of her assailants in her testimony, both on direct and re-direct examination. The Court rejected appellant’s claim that darkness prevented identification, noting the victim first met the accused in daylight, had proximity to them, and even described appellant’s tattoo. Her testimony was straightforward, spontaneous, and consistent, making her a credible witness. The medical findings corroborated her account of forcible defloration. The Court also found that force and intimidation were present, as the victim was forcibly taken, made to drink, and was only 12 years old, with the accused taking advantage of her vulnerability. The information sufficiently alleged conspiracy. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was proper. The Court modified the award of civil indemnity to P50,000 and added moral damages of P50,000.