GR 181084; (June, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 181084 June 16, 2009
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Bartolome Tampus and Ida Montesclaros, Defendants. Ida Montesclaros, Appellant.
FACTS
The case stems from two criminal cases for rape filed against Bartolome Tampus and Ida Montesclaros. In Criminal Case No. 013324-L, both were charged as conspirators in the rape of ABC, the 13-year-old daughter of Ida, on April 1, 1995. The information alleged that Tampus had carnal knowledge of ABC while she was in deep slumber due to drunkenness, with Ida giving permission for the rape. In Criminal Case No. 013325-L, only Tampus was charged with raping ABC on April 4, 1995, by means of threat and intimidation. ABC testified that on April 1, 1995, she was forced to drink beer by Tampus and her mother, became intoxicated, and overheard Tampus asking Ida for permission to have sexual intercourse with her, to which Ida agreed before leaving for work. ABC woke up to find her clothing in disarray, pain in her body, and blood stains. On April 4, 1995, Tampus threatened to kill her and raped her again while she was alone. ABC reported the incidents to her aunt and the police. A medico-legal examination revealed healed lacerations on her hymen. Tampus and Ida denied the allegations, presenting alibis. A medical certification showed Ida was previously treated for schizophrenia. The Regional Trial Court convicted Tampus as principal in both rape counts and Ida as an accomplice in the April 1 incident, appreciating in her favor the mitigating circumstance of illness. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of Ida as an accomplice with modification to the penalty and damages. Tampus died pending appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of appellant Ida Montesclaros as an accomplice in the rape of her daughter, ABC, on April 1, 1995.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court upheld the findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeals, giving great weight and respect to their factual conclusions, especially since they were based on the credible and straightforward testimony of the child-victim, ABC. The Court found that the guilt of Tampus as the principal in the rape on April 1, 1995, was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the finding of Ida’s guilt as an accomplice, for giving permission to Tampus to rape her daughter, was also sustained. The Court agreed with the lower courts’ appreciation of the mitigating circumstance of illness (schizophrenia) which diminished the exercise of her will-power but did not deprive her of consciousness of her acts. The penalty imposed by the Court of Appeals was affirmed.