G.R. No. 218399 , March 02, 2016
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Godofredo Comboy y Cronico, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

On August 6, 2009, five Informations were filed charging Godofredo Comboy with raping his minor biological daughter, AAA. The charges involved incidents in 2006 (three counts), February 2008, and May 17, 2009. The prosecution alleged that in 2006 and February 2008, AAA, while sleeping beside her brother BBB, was awakened by Comboy on top of her with his penis inside her vagina. On May 17, 2009, AAA woke up to find Comboy on top of her and in the process of removing her underwear; she pushed him away, and BBB reported the matter. AAA reported the incidents on May 28, 2009, and a medical examination revealed hymenal lacerations consistent with penetration. Comboy pleaded not guilty and interposed the defenses of denial and alibi, claiming he was in Manila/Olongapo during the alleged incidents in 2006 and 2008, and that AAA fabricated the charges due to anger. The parties stipulated that AAA is a minor and Comboy is her father.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the Regional Trial Court’s decision finding accused-appellant Godofredo Comboy guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of Statutory Rape and one count of Attempted Rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the assailed CA Decision. The Court held that the prosecution established Comboy’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. AAA’s clear, categorical, and consistent testimony, corroborated by medical findings, prevailed over Comboy’s defenses of denial and alibi, which were inherently weak. The Court found that moral ascendancy and influence as AAA’s biological father supplied the force and intimidation necessary for the crime. For the incidents in 2006 (Crim. Case No. T-5006) and February 2008 (Crim. Case No. T-5009), the elements of statutory rape were present, warranting the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count and the corresponding awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages. For the May 17, 2009 incident (Crim. Case No. T-5010), Comboy’s acts constituted Attempted Rape, as he commenced the commission of the crime by being on top of AAA and removing her underwear but was prevented from consummation by BBB’s intervention, not by his own desistance. He was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty and ordered to pay moral damages. The Court acquitted Comboy in two other cases (Crim. Case Nos. T-5007 and T-5008) due to insufficiency of evidence.