GR 195523; (June, 2013) (Digest)
G.R. No. 195523 ; June 5, 2013
People of the Philippines, Appellee, vs. Ernesto Gani y Tupas, Appellant.
FACTS
On or about February 21, 1997, in Cauayan, Negros Occidental, appellant Ernesto Gani y Tupas, the uncle of the victim, AAA, who was then five years old, was charged with rape. The Information alleged that by means of force, violence, and intimidation, he had carnal knowledge of AAA against her will. The prosecution established that on the afternoon of said date, AAA was harvesting vegetables with her elder brother when appellant arrived carrying a knife. Appellant instructed AAA’s brother to go home ahead. After the brother left, appellant removed AAA’s underwear, placed himself on top of her, inserted his penis into her vagina, and after the act, slashed her vagina with a knife, causing serious injury. AAA reported the incident to her grandmother, was brought for medical treatment, and a criminal complaint was filed on her behalf by her aunt, Leticia Alingasa. Appellant pleaded not guilty and interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was in Quezon City at the time and pointing to his brother-in-law, Ermelo Alingasa, as the perpetrator. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape, considering the victim’s minority and her relationship to the appellant as uncle, and sentenced him to death. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua pursuant to Republic Act No. 9346 and increased the moral damages.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant of the crime charged despite the fact that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the modified decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the factual findings of the trial court, especially on the credibility of the rape victim, are accorded great weight and respect. AAA’s testimony was clear, consistent, and spontaneously given, and as a child of tender years, her testimony is given full weight and credit. Appellant’s defense of alibi and denial was inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive and categorical identification by the complainant. The Court found no cogent reason to disturb the lower courts’ findings and upheld the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages.