G.R. No. 192180 ; March 21, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ALIAS KINO LASCANO (at large) and ALFREDO DELABAJAN alias TABOYBOY, Accused. ALFREDO DELABAJAN, Appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Alfredo Delabajan, was charged with three counts of rape alongside his co-accused, alias Kino Lascano, for the sexual assault of AAA, a blind woman. The prosecution evidence established that on the night of the incident, both accused entered AAA’s house, threatened to kill her, and took turns raping her. AAA, though blind, positively identified the appellant and Kino as her assailants through voice recognition, knowing them as neighbors and friends of her brother. The appellant raised the defense of alibi, claiming he was gathering coconuts in a nearby sitio at the time.
The Regional Trial Court found the appellant guilty of three counts of rape, a decision affirmed with modification by the Court of Appeals, which increased the counts to six based on a finding of conspiracy. The CA held that the appellant actively participated by tying the victim’s hands and holding her feet during the assault. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging his conviction.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the appellant’s guilt for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the sufficiency of the victim’s identification and the existence of conspiracy.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal but modified the CA’s ruling on the number of rape counts. The Court upheld the conviction, affirming that all elements of rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code were proven: carnal knowledge was achieved through force, threat, and intimidation. The victim’s testimony was deemed credible, consistent, and corroborated by medical findings. Her identification of the appellant by voice was accepted as reliable, given her long acquaintance with him and the heightened auditory perception developed by the blind.
On conspiracy, the Court found that the appellant and Kino demonstrated a common design through their coordinated actions—entering together, jointly issuing threats, and with one assisting while the other raped. This unity of purpose made each liable for the acts of the other. However, the Supreme Court held that their concerted actions constituted two counts of rape (one committed by each accused), not six, as each conspirator is liable for the rape he personally committed and the rape committed by his co-conspirator. The defense of alibi was rejected for failure to prove the physical impossibility of the appellant’s presence at the crime scene. The penalties of reclusion perpetua for each count were affirmed. Civil indemnity and moral damages of ₱50,000 each per count were sustained, with an additional award of ₱30,000 as exemplary damages per count.