GR 183565; (April, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 183565 , April 8, 2009
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EDUARDO ABOGANDA, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Eduardo Aboganda was charged with two counts of rape committed against his daughter, AAA, in February and March 2000 in Leyte. The Informations alleged the use of force and intimidation, with one specifying he was armed with a sharp bladed weapon (pisao). AAA testified that in February 2000, her father brought her to her grandmother’s house, threatened her with a small bolo (pisaw), undressed her, pinned her down, and had carnal knowledge against her will. In March 2000, he again dragged her to a room in their house, undressed her, pinned her down, and raped her while her brothers were away. AAA reported the incidents in April 2000. Dr. Edna Lagunay’s medico-legal findings indicated positive hyperemia of the labia minora, consistent with friction from possible penile insertion. The defense consisted solely of Aboganda’s denial, claiming the accusations were orchestrated by his mother-in-law due to enmity. The Regional Trial Court convicted him of two counts of incestuous rape and imposed the death penalty. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the qualification to qualified rape due to the use of a deadly weapon, not due to the victim’s minority which was not alleged.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed accused-appellant’s conviction for two counts of qualified rape.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the conviction with modifications to the damages. The Court held:
1. The Informations were not defective. The specific dates of commission are not essential elements of the crime of rape; an approximation of the date suffices.
2. AAA’s credible and categorical testimony, corroborated by medico-legal findings, sufficiently established the facts of the rape. The defense of denial cannot prevail over positive identification.
3. The crime committed was qualified rape under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code due to the use of a deadly weapon (the pisaw or small bolo), as clearly alleged in one Information and proven during trial. The qualifying circumstance of minority and relationship, while present, was not the basis for qualification in this instance.
4. The penalty was properly reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, in accordance with Republic Act No. 9346 .
5. The awards of damages were modified in line with prevailing jurisprudence. For each count of rape, accused-appellant is ordered to pay civil indemnity of PhP 75,000, moral damages of PhP 75,000, and exemplary damages of PhP 25,000.