G.R. No. 187229; February 22, 2012
Arnel Sison y Escuadro, Petitioner, vs. People of the Philippines, Respondent.

FACTS

The petitioner, Arnel Sison, was charged with Kidnapping with Rape and Illegal Possession of Firearms. The prosecution evidence established that on April 16, 2003, the private complainant, AAA, boarded Sison’s passenger van in Bocaue. Upon reaching Cubao, Quezon City, and with AAA as the sole remaining passenger, Sison diverted the vehicle, brandished a .45 caliber pistol, and threatened her. He then forced her to a motel in Sta. Mesa, Manila. Inside a room, despite her pleas and resistance, Sison pinned her down, removed her clothing, and had carnal knowledge of her. Afterward, he dropped her off in Cubao with threats against reporting the incident. AAA immediately reported the crime, leading to Sison’s arrest hours later, where the firearm was recovered from him.
The defense presented a different account, claiming the sexual encounter was consensual and that AAA was a sex worker who voluntarily went to the motel. Sison denied kidnapping AAA or using a gun to coerce her. He alleged the relationship was commercial and that the charges were fabricated after a dispute over payment. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals rejected the defense, finding AAA’s testimony credible, consistent, and corroborated by her prompt reporting and the recovery of the firearm.

ISSUE

The core issues were: (1) whether the prosecution proved the crimes of Kidnapping with Rape and Illegal Possession of Firearms beyond reasonable doubt; and (2) whether the penalty imposed was correct.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Kidnapping with Rape but acquitted Sison of Illegal Possession of Firearms. On the rape charge, the Court upheld the lower courts’ findings, emphasizing that the credibility of the victim’s clear, unwavering, and corroborated testimony prevails over the accused’s bare denial. The element of force and intimidation was established by the use of the firearm to subdue the victim’s will from the van to the motel room. The Court found the defense of consensuality inherently weak and unsupported by evidence, noting that the victim’s immediate outcry and actions were inconsistent with a fabricated story.
Regarding the firearms charge, the Court applied the doctrine from People v. Ladjaalam and People v. Espino, which holds that illegal possession of firearms is absorbed as an aggravating element in the crime of Kidnapping with Rape when the firearm is used to facilitate the latter crime. Since the information for Kidnapping with Rape specifically alleged the use of a firearm, the separate conviction for illegal possession constituted double jeopardy. Thus, that conviction was reversed and set aside. The penalty for the complex crime of Kidnapping with Rape was affirmed as reclusion perpetua, with corresponding damages awarded to the victim.