G.R. Nos. 139788 & 139827; October 3, 2002
People of the Philippines, appellee, vs. Rogelio del Ayre y Litran, appellant.

FACTS

Two separate Informations charged Rogelio del Ayre y Litran with two counts of rape against his daughter, Zaira M. del Ayre. The first incident allegedly occurred on February 16, 1993, when Zaira was nine years old. The second incident allegedly occurred on September 26, 1994, when she was ten. The prosecution’s evidence established that on both dates, in their house in Obando, Bulacan, appellant forcibly had carnal knowledge of Zaira, threatening to kill her and her family members if she reported the incidents. Zaira only reported the rapes to her grandmother on July 20, 1997, leading to appellant’s arrest. A medical examination revealed her hymen was intact but distendible with a wide orifice. The defense presented alibi and denial, claiming appellant was at the market selling oysters with his wife during the alleged incidents and that the charges were instigated by his mother-in-law due to a land dispute. The Regional Trial Court found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua for the first count (Criminal Case No. 1402-M-97) and death for the second count (Criminal Case No. 1403-M-97). The case is under automatic review.

ISSUE

The main issues are: (1) the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence to prove appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt for two counts of rape; (2) the credibility of the defense’s evidence; and (3) the propriety of imposing the death penalty for one count despite the lack of qualifying circumstances alleged in the information.

RULING

The Supreme Court found the appeal partly meritorious. It affirmed appellant’s conviction for two counts of rape. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Zaira’s credibility, finding her categorical and coherent declarations credible, and rejected appellant’s alibi due to the short distance between his house and the market. However, the Court modified the penalty. It ruled that the death penalty cannot be imposed for the second count (Criminal Case No. 1403-M-97) because the information did not allege or specify the relationship of the victim to the offender as a qualifying circumstance for incestuous rape. Since the information merely alleged that appellant had carnal knowledge of Zaira against her will and without her consent, and did not state she was his daughter, the crime is simple rape punishable by reclusion perpetua. The Court affirmed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for the first count (Criminal Case No. 1402-M-97) and modified the penalty for the second count from death to reclusion perpetua. The award of moral damages was sustained.