G.R. No. 227841, August 19, 2020
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JOSEPH MANLOLO Y GANTE, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Joseph Manlolo y Gante, was charged with the qualified rape of his six-year-old daughter, AAA, on or about August 10, 2011, in Barangay Camantaya, San Agustin, Romblon. The Information alleged the rape was committed through force, threat, and intimidation, taking advantage of AAA’s minority, with the aggravating circumstance that the accused is the father of the victim.
The prosecution presented AAA, her mother BBB, and Dr. Deogracias Muleta. AAA testified that Manlolo raped her several times when she was six years old, inserting his finger and sex organ into her vagina, causing pain. These incidents occurred in their house at night when her mother was away. She specifically recalled an incident on a Wednesday. BBB testified that on August 10, 2011, she found AAA sulking, who later revealed her vagina was “tusok” by her father. BBB later reported the incident to her mother and then to the police. Dr. Muleta’s medical examination revealed lacerations in AAA’s hymen and evidence of blunt force or penetrating trauma consistent with a male organ.
The defense, presented by Manlolo and corroborated by his sister Joan, denied the accusation. Manlolo claimed that on August 10, 2011, he was at his mother-in-law’s house, then fetched AAA from school, and was at home with his family and sister in the afternoon and evening. He asserted that BBB fabricated the charge due to marital discord.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Manlolo of rape in relation to R.A. No. 7610 and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto. Manlolo appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of accused-appellant Joseph Manlolo y Gante for the crime of qualified rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the conviction with MODIFICATION to the awards of damages.
The Court held that all elements of qualified rape under Article 266-A(1)(d) and Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) sexual congress; (2) with a woman; (3) done by force and without consent; (4) the victim was under 18 years of age; and (5) the offender is a parent of the victim. The victim’s credible testimony, corroborated by her mother’s timely disclosure and the medical findings, established the crime. The defense of denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court found no improper motive for the young victim to falsely accuse her father.
The award of damages was modified in line with prevailing jurisprudence. Accused-appellant was ordered to pay AAA the amounts of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages, and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages, all with legal interest of 6% per annum from finality of judgment until fully paid.