GR 171731; (August, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 171731; August 11, 2006
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. JOVEN OCAMPO and ERWIN MAGALLONES, Accused. ERWIN MAGALLONES, Appellant.
FACTS
On July 14, 1995, in Irosin, Sorsogon, Diane Balesnomo was followed home by Joven Ocampo, Erwin Magallones, and another companion after she refused their invitation to go to a waiting shed. Once Diane was inside her house, Ocampo and Magallones entered her room through a window. Magallones undressed her and had sexual intercourse with her while she was standing. She tried to push them away but was overpowered. After Magallones, Ocampo also had sexual intercourse with her under the same circumstances. When Diane’s mother called her, she dressed and went out, later seeing Ocampo jump from the window as she recounted the assault to her mother.
An Information for rape was filed against both accused. The Regional Trial Court convicted them, sentencing Ocampo to an indeterminate penalty and Magallones to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Magallones appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove force and intimidation, as Diane did not shout for help during the incident.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution proved the element of force or intimidation in the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the element of force or intimidation was sufficiently established. The factual findings of the trial court, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are accorded great weight and respect, especially on matters of witness credibility. The Court emphasized that there is no standard behavioral response for a rape victim; the failure to shout for help does not negate the presence of force or intimidation. Diane’s testimony detailed how the two accused entered her home uninvited, pulled her back when she tried to escape, and physically overpowered her during the sexual assault. This sequence of acts constituted the requisite force.
The Court further noted that the medical certificate corroborated Diane’s account, and no ill motive was shown for her to falsely accuse the appellants. The defense of denial could not prevail over her positive and credible identification. However, the Supreme Court modified the damages awarded. It increased the civil indemnity to P50,000.00 and affirmed the P50,000.00 moral damages, both with legal interest. The award of exemplary damages was deleted for lack of legal basis, as no aggravating circumstance attended the crime.