G.R. No. 182057 February 6, 2009
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Restituto C. Valenzuela, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Restituto Valenzuela, was charged with two counts of qualified rape against his daughter, AAA. In Criminal Case No. 8880, the Information alleged that sometime in 1994, in Aroroy, Masbate, the accused, by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of his daughter AAA, then nine years old. In Criminal Case No. 8881, the Information alleged that in December 1997, under similar circumstances, he raped AAA when she was twelve years old. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented AAA, who testified that in 1994, when her mother was not home, her father ordered her into a bedroom, undressed her, sucked her breast, kissed her body, inserted his finger and then his penis into her vagina, causing her pain and bleeding, and warned her not to tell anyone. She further testified that the rapes continued until 1998, and she gave birth in October 1998, identifying the appellant as the father. Dr. Marilou Hernandez confirmed AAA’s pregnancy but found no fresh lacerations, attributing this to the lapse of time since the last alleged incident. BBB, AAA’s mother, testified that she learned of the abuse in August 1998 after noticing AAA’s bulging stomach and that AAA had previously disclosed the abuse to her uncle. The defense consisted solely of the appellant’s testimony, denying the charges and claiming they were fabricated by his brother-in-law, DDD, due to a prior altercation. The Regional Trial Court convicted the appellant of two counts of qualified rape and imposed the death penalty for each. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua for each count, increased the civil indemnity to ₱75,000.00, and reduced moral damages to ₱50,000.00 per count. The appellant appealed, contending the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt for the two counts of qualified rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal in Criminal Case No. 8880 and granted the appeal in Criminal Case No. 8881. For Criminal Case No. 8880 (1994 rape), the Court affirmed the conviction. The crime was statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as the victim was under twelve years old; thus, force, intimidation, and injury were immaterial. The credible and detailed testimony of AAA, who positively identified her father as the perpetrator and described the carnal knowledge, was sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense of denial and alleged fabrication was unsubstantiated. The penalty imposed by the Court of Appeals (reclusion perpetua) was affirmed, along with the awards of ₱75,000.00 as civil indemnity and ₱50,000.00 as moral damages. For Criminal Case No. 8881 (1997 rape), the Court acquitted the appellant. The Information alleged the rape occurred in December 1997 when AAA was twelve years old. Since she was no longer under twelve, the crime would be simple rape, requiring proof of force or intimidation. However, AAA’s testimony for this specific incident was vague and lacked the requisite details regarding the use of force or intimidation; her testimony primarily referred to the 1994 incident and subsequent repeated rapes without specifically detailing the December 1997 event. The prosecution thus failed to prove the essential element of force or intimidation for the rape charged in 1997. The appellant was acquitted in Criminal Case No. 8881 on the ground of reasonable doubt.