GR 224584; (September, 2019) (Digest)
G.R. No. 224584 , September 04, 2019
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ZZZ, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
FACTS
The accused-appellant ZZZ was charged with two counts of rape against his 13-year-old daughter, AAA. In Criminal Case No. 2999, he was accused of rape by sexual intercourse on or about October 26, 2007. In Criminal Case No. 3000, he was accused of rape by sexual assault on or about November 3, 2007. During trial, AAA testified that on October 26, 2007, around 1:00 AM, while she was sleeping in a bunk house, appellant removed her shorts and panty, held her hands, covered her mouth, spread her legs with his knee, and inserted his penis into her vagina for about twenty minutes. He threatened her with knives, warning to kill her, her siblings, and her mother if she did not submit. On November 3, 2007, around 1:00 AM, appellant inserted his finger into her vagina for about five minutes. AAA confided in her mother and uncle, leading to a police report and medical examination. Dr. Efraim Collado found healed lacerations in AAA’s vagina. The defense presented alibi and denial, claiming appellant was in Davao City on October 26 and in General Santos City on November 3. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of qualified rape by sexual intercourse and qualified rape by sexual assault. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.
ISSUE
1. Whether the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape by sexual intercourse in Criminal Case No. 2999.
2. Whether the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape by sexual assault in Criminal Case No. 3000.
RULING
1. Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for qualified rape by sexual intercourse under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(a) of the Revised Penal Code. The Court found AAA’s testimony credible, straightforward, and consistent. The medical findings of healed lacerations corroborated her account. The alleged inconsistencies in her testimony regarding the time she arrived home and slept were deemed minor and did not affect her credibility. The element of force, threat, or intimidation was established by appellant’s moral ascendancy as AAA’s father and his specific threat with knives. The qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship were duly proven.
2. Yes. The Supreme Court also affirmed the conviction for qualified rape by sexual assault under Article 266-A, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code. AAA’s testimony that appellant inserted his finger into her vagina was clear and credible. The act constituted sexual assault, defined as an act of sexual penetration with any part of the body or an object. The qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship were likewise present. The Court modified the penalty, applying Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610 , and imposed an indeterminate penalty of fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months of reclusion temporal minimum, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal medium, as maximum. The awards of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages were also modified in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.