G.R. Nos. 144340-42. April 17, 2002.
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Rodelio Aquino y Roda, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Rodelio Aquino y Roda, was charged with two counts of rape against his 5-year-old niece Charlaine Bautista and 4-year-old niece Charmela Bautista, and one count of acts of lasciviousness against his 6-year-old niece Charmaine Bautista. The incidents occurred in Taguig, Metro Manila, in October 1999. The appellant’s house was about one meter away from the complainants’ house. The children often visited him, calling him “daddy.” The abuse was discovered on October 12, 1999, when Cherry Lauria, a friend of the children’s mother, overheard Charlaine warn Charmela not to go to the appellant’s house because he might rape her. Upon questioning, the children revealed that the appellant had sexually abused them. Charlaine testified that the appellant made her apply baby oil to his penis, after which he applied oil to her vagina and inserted his penis. Charmaine and Charmela reported that the appellant had fondled their genitals. The children were examined by Dr. Emmanuel Reyes of the PNP Crime Laboratory, who found a healing laceration on Charlaine’s hymen and congestion on the fourchettes of Charmaine and Charmela, consistent with manipulation. The appellant denied the charges, claiming alibi and suggesting his sister Winnie fabricated the charges because he refused to loan her money. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape for the act against Charlaine, imposing the death penalty, and guilty of acts of lasciviousness for the acts against Charmela and Charmaine, imposing reclusion temporal. The case is before the Supreme Court for automatic review of the death penalty.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant based on the testimonies of the child victims and the medical evidence, and in imposing the death penalty for qualified rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for qualified rape in Criminal Case No. 116859-H and modified the penalty. The Court held that the testimonies of the child victims, given in a straightforward and spontaneous manner, were credible and sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The medical findings corroborated their accounts. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victims. The relationship of uncle and niece qualified the rape under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, warranting the death penalty. However, due to the prohibition of the death penalty under Republic Act No. 9346, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. The Court also increased the civil indemnity to P75,000.00 and awarded moral and exemplary damages. Regarding Criminal Cases Nos. 116860-H and 116861 for acts of lasciviousness, the Supreme Court declined jurisdiction because these lesser offenses were not committed on the same occasion or did not arise out of the same occurrence as the qualified rape, and thus were not included in the automatic review. The appeals for these cases were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.