G.R. No. 183564 ; June 29, 2011
People of the Philippines vs. Lucresio Espina, Appellant.

FACTS

On December 7, 1997, the victim, AAA, then 11 years old, attended a benefit dance with her stepmother BBB and stepsister CCC in Barangay Bantigue, Isabel, Leyte. At around 11:00 p.m., AAA went outside the dance hall, where her father, appellant Lucresio Espina, called her from a nearby mango tree and told her he had an errand. AAA obeyed. The appellant brought her to a distant dark place, removed his pants and brief, removed AAA’s panty, ordered her to lie down, went on top of her, and inserted his penis into her vagina. AAA shouted for help, but the appellant covered her mouth. After the act, the appellant ordered AAA to put her panty back on, noticed blood, and threatened to kill her if she reported the incident. He then brought her home to change clothes, hid her clothes, and they returned to the dance hall. Later, at home, AAA’s aunt DDD noticed she had difficulty climbing the stairs. BBB examined AAA and saw blood in her vagina. AAA then revealed she was molested by the appellant. The next morning, BBB brought AAA to the Municipal Health Center for examination by Dr. Refelina Cerillo. The prosecution charged the appellant with rape. The appellant denied the charge, claiming he was at a drinking session and fell asleep elsewhere. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty of qualified rape and imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua and increased the awards for civil indemnity and moral damages to ₱75,000.00 each, and awarded ₱25,000.00 as exemplary damages.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of appellant Lucresio Espina for rape and properly modified the penalty and damages.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal but MODIFIED the designation of the crime, the penalty, and the exemplary damages. The Court held that the prosecution positively established the elements of statutory rape under Article 266-A(1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code: (1) the appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA, as proven by her clear, straightforward, and consistent testimony corroborated by medical findings; and (2) AAA was below 12 years old at the time, as stipulated by the parties during pre-trial and corroborated by testimony (born October 26, 1986, 11 years old in December 1997). The appellant’s defenses of denial and alibi were unmeritorious, as denial cannot prevail over positive identification, and alibi fails when the accused is proven to be at the crime scene.
The crime is statutory rape, not qualified rape, as force and intimidation are immaterial when the victim is under 12. However, the qualifying circumstance under Article 266-B that the offender is a parent (the appellant is AAA’s legitimate father) and the victim is under 18 would have warranted the death penalty. But due to Republic Act No. 9346 , which prohibits the death penalty, the penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.
The awards of civil indemnity and moral damages, each at ₱75,000.00, were affirmed as they are in accord with jurisprudence. Civil indemnity is awarded automatically upon a finding of rape, and moral damages are awarded without need of further proof. The exemplary damages were increased from ₱25,000.00 to ₱30,000.00 pursuant to established jurisprudence.
DISPOSITIVE:
The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the CA decision with modifications: (a) appellant is found GUILTY of STATUTORY RAPE under Article 266-A(1)(d); (b) he is sentenced to RECLUSION PERPETUA without eligibility for parole; and (c) exemplary damages are INCREASED to ₱30,000.00.