G.R. No. 240424 , March 18, 2021
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Eugene Seguisabal, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

On November 2, 2009, in Cebu, private complainant AAA, then 21 years old, was with her boyfriend Nathaniel Seguisabal. After visiting a cemetery, they went to a nipa hut. Nathaniel’s cousins, Roger and accused-appellant Eugene Seguisabal, arrived and informed AAA that her parents were looking for her. Nathaniel, fearing AAA’s father, instructed Roger to bring AAA home using his motorcycle. Instead, Roger drove past AAA’s house to Barangay ���. There, Roger demanded sexual intercourse as a favor. AAA refused, struggled free, and ran away. She chanced upon Eugene and asked for help. Eugene instead dragged her to a nearby school building, pushed her to the floor, removed her pants and underwear despite her struggle, and had carnal knowledge of her. AAA shouted for help, but Eugene covered her mouth, threatened to kill her, and choked her. Afterward, Eugene drove AAA to a cemetery, threatening her not to report the incident. AAA later reported the rape to Nathaniel, the barangay captain, and the police, and underwent a medical examination which revealed extragenital injuries but no genital injuries. Eugene admitted to sexual intercourse but claimed it was consensual, alleging AAA had a reputation for casual sex and that Nathaniel had offered AAA to him. The Regional Trial Court convicted Eugene of rape, a decision affirmed with modification by the Court of Appeals.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of accused-appellant Eugene Seguisabal for the crime of rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, specifically in giving credence to AAA’s testimony and finding the elements of rape proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the conviction. The Court held that the testimony of AAA was credible, straightforward, and sufficient to establish all elements of rape. The elements of carnal knowledge through force, threat, or intimidation were proven beyond reasonable doubt through AAA’s consistent narration of how Eugene employed force, threats, and intimidation to have sexual intercourse against her will. The Court ruled that the alleged promiscuity of the victim is immaterial, as a woman of loose morals can still be raped, the essence of the crime being carnal knowledge without consent. The lack of hymenal injuries does not negate rape, as penetration alone is sufficient. The defense of consensual sex was rejected. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was upheld. Accused-appellant was ordered to pay AAA P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, with 6% interest per annum from finality until fully paid.