G.R. No. 199494 ; November 27, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. WELMO LINSIE y BINEVIDEZ, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Welmo Linsie y Binevidez was charged with the rape of AAA on December 14, 2005, in Parañaque City. The Information alleged that he, armed with a knife and by means of force, threat, and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of AAA against her will. He pleaded not guilty. AAA testified that on the date of the incident, while she was home alone and ill, appellant knocked on her door. When she opened it, he pushed his way in, pointed a knife at her neck, covered her mouth, punched her stomach when she resisted, and forced her to undress. He then proceeded to rape her. Afterward, he threatened to kill her if she told anyone. She reported the incident to her common-law husband the next day, and they subsequently had it blottered at the barangay. A medical examination was conducted on December 17, 2005. The defense presented an alibi. Witness Allan Talinghale testified that appellant was working at a construction site, buying items from his store and mixing cement at the time of the alleged rape. Appellant himself denied the accusation, claiming he was at work all day and only learned of the charge on December 16, 2005. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of simple rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, and ordered him to pay damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s conviction of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the decisions of the lower courts. The Court held that the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The credible and categorical testimony of AAA, detailing the rape through force and intimidation with a knife, was consistent and worthy of belief. The medical certificate, while not showing fresh lacerations due to the three-day delay in examination, was consistent with her claim of recent loss of virginity. The defense of alibi was inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court found no reason to deviate from the factual findings of the trial court, which are accorded great weight and respect. The penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and the awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages were affirmed.