G.R. No. 166566 ; November 23, 2010
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. WENCESLAO DERI y BENITEZ, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Wenceslao Deri was charged with three counts of rape committed against his daughter, AAA. The incidents occurred in March 1993 (when AAA was 11 years old), August 14, 1995 (when she was 14), and October 17, 1997 (when she was 16). AAA testified that her father, by means of force, threats, and intimidation, sexually assaulted her on these occasions while her mother was working abroad. The abuse was revealed in October 1997 to the family househelp, Lydia Velez, who then reported it to AAA’s grandfather and barangay authorities. A medico-legal examination confirmed deep, healed lacerations consistent with sexual intercourse.
The defense interposed denial and alibi, claiming the charges were fabricated due to AAA’s resentment over his strict discipline. The Regional Trial Court convicted Deri, imposing the death penalty for two counts and reclusion perpetua for one. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties to reclusion perpetua for all counts following the abolition of the death penalty.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of accused-appellant for three counts of rape.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is affirmed. The Supreme Court upheld the factual findings of the lower courts, emphasizing that the credibility of the victim’s testimony is paramount in rape cases. AAA’s detailed, candid, and consistent narration of the traumatic events, corroborated by the medico-legal findings and the testimony of the househelp, constituted proof beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found her account credible and natural, especially given the moral ascendancy and influence a father holds, which substitutes for the required force or intimidation.
The defense of denial and alibi, inherently weak and unsupported by clear evidence, cannot prevail over the positive identification and credible testimony of the victim. The Court also ruled that the failure to allege AAA’s exact age in the Information for the 1997 incident was not fatal, as the charge was for rape through force and intimidation, not statutory rape. However, for the 1993 incident, where AAA was 11, the crime qualified as statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, where carnal knowledge with a girl under twelve is rape per se. The penalties were properly modified to reclusion perpetua for each count, in line with prevailing law.