G.R. No. 184791 ; April 16, 2009
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-appellee, vs. Pedro Nogpo, Jr. a.k.a. “Tandodoy,” Accused-appellant.

FACTS

On August 20, 2001, an Information was filed charging Pedro Nogpo, Jr. with rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The charge alleged that on or about 4:00 a.m. on March 9, 2001, in Barangay XXX, Municipality of XXX, Province of XXX, the accused, by using force, threats, and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of AAA against her will. The accused pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution’s evidence established that on March 9, 2001, at around 3:00 a.m., AAA’s husband, BBB, left their house. AAA was later awakened by the accused, who smelled of liquor, seated on her bed and trying to embrace her. When she shouted for help, the accused punched her abdomen and then her breast, locked her neck, mashed her thigh, and threatened to kill her if she continued making noise. The accused subdued her and had sexual intercourse with her while covering her mouth. Afterward, he threatened to kill her family if she reported the incident. A witness, Rolando Delloro, saw the accused walking away from AAA’s house around 5:00 a.m. AAA reported the rape to her mother-in-law and then to the police. A medical examination at Bicol Medical Center revealed tenderness and hematoma on her left breast and the presence of spermatozoa.
The defense presented a different version. The accused admitted to having sexual intercourse with AAA on March 9, 2001, but claimed it was consensual, alleging they had been in an illicit relationship since June 6, 1998. He testified that AAA had instructed him to come to her house that morning because her husband would be away. His sister, Ofelia Nogpo, corroborated that AAA had visited her store looking for the accused the day before.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the lower courts, finding the accused guilty of rape beyond reasonable doubt. The Court held that AAA’s testimony was credible, straightforward, and consistent. She provided a detailed account of the rape, including the force, threats, and intimidation employed by the accused. Her immediate reporting of the incident and the medical findings corroborated her testimony. The Court rejected the defense of a prior illicit affair, noting it was uncorroborated and inherently improbable. The defense witnesses’ testimonies were deemed insufficient to overturn the positive identification and credible narration of the victim. The Court emphasized that in rape cases, the testimony of the victim, if credible, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. The accused was sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay AAA ₱50,000.00 as civil indemnity and ₱50,000.00 as moral damages.