G.R. Nos. 145309-10; April 4, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. VIRGILIO FLORES Y AQUINO, appellant.

FACTS

Appellant Virgilio Flores was charged with two counts of rape committed against his daughter, Loribelle Ruth Flores, who was eight years old at the time of the first incident in April 1995. The Informations alleged that the crimes occurred in Pasig, Rizal, by taking advantage of his paternal relationship and moral ascendancy, with the use of force and intimidation. The victim testified that the first rape occurred at her grandmother’s house when her father, while the family was sleeping, went on top of her, kissed her, and attempted penetration, causing her pain. A second incident occurred in August 1996 when he again forced himself on her. The medical examination revealed an intact hymen but the medico-legal officer testified that labial penetration was still possible.
The defense consisted of a denial, alleging the charges were fabricated by the victim’s grandmother due to a personal grudge. The appellant’s wife, Lorraine, initially supported her daughter but later recanted and testified for the defense. The Regional Trial Court found the appellant guilty of two counts of qualified rape and imposed the death penalty for each count, leading to this automatic review.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of qualified rape and imposing the death penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the victim’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. The defense of denial and imputation of improper motive could not prevail over the positive identification and candid narration of the minor victim. The medical finding of an intact hymen does not negate rape, as the law recognizes that even the slightest penetration of the labia constitutes carnal knowledge. The Court upheld the finding that the appellant committed rape through moral ascendancy and intimidation as the father.
However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua for each count. While the crimes were committed in 1995 and 1996, and the victim was under eighteen and the offender was her parent—qualifying circumstances under Republic Act No. 7659 —the Informations were fatally defective. They failed to specifically allege the victim’s exact age at the time of the commission of each rape. Citing People v. Panganiban, the Court held that for the death penalty to be imposed, the qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship must be stated with specificity in the information. The failure to do so violates the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation. Thus, the appellant could only be held liable for simple rape, punishable by reclusion perpetua. The Court also awarded civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages for each count.