G.R. No. 242682, July 1, 2019
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. Nerissa Mora a.k.a. Neri Balagta Mora and Maria Salome Polvoriza, Accused; Nerissa Mora a.k.a. Neri Balagta Mora, Accused-Appellant

FACTS

This is an appeal from a conviction for Qualified Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208. The Information alleged that on November 26, 2011, until July 5, 2012, in Polangui, Albay, accused Nerissa Mora and Maria Salome Polvoriza, conspiring and using deception while taking advantage of the victim’s minority, hired and maintained the minor AAA for prostitution at Otoy’s Videoke Bar in Buhi, Camarines Sur. The prosecution presented that Mora convinced the 16-year-old AAA to go with her to Buhi, where she left AAA at Polvoriza’s bar. Polvoriza then locked AAA in a room, confiscated her phone, and forced her to work as an entertainer under the name “Rizza M. Rañada,” compelling her to use shabu, dance naked, and have sex with customers. After eight months, AAA escaped and reported the incident. A medico-legal examination confirmed hymenal lacerations. In her defense, Mora claimed AAA insisted on going to Buhi and voluntarily entered the bar, and she believed AAA was of age. Polvoriza claimed AAA introduced herself as an adult entertainer seeking work and presented a health card. The Regional Trial Court convicted both, imposing life imprisonment and a P2,000,000.00 fine, plus damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modification, adding legal interest on damages. Only Mora appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether or not accused-appellant Nerissa Mora’s conviction for Qualified Trafficking in Persons should be upheld.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is upheld. The Supreme Court found the appeal without merit. The prosecution established all elements of Qualified Trafficking in Persons under Section 4(e) in relation to Section 6(a) of RA 9208: (a) Mora, through deception and by taking advantage of AAA’s vulnerability as a minor, recruited and transported her; (b) Mora delivered AAA to Polvoriza’s bar; and (c) Polvoriza then maintained AAA for prostitution and sexual exploitation. The Court affirmed that the victim’s consent is immaterial, especially when the victim is a child, as the law is designed to protect minors from exploitation regardless of apparent voluntariness. The Court deferred to the factual findings of the trial court, which were affirmed by the CA, noting no reason to overturn their assessment of witness credibility. The penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P2,000,000.00 was affirmed as proper under Section 10(c) of RA 9208. The awards of P500,000.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages were also affirmed, with legal interest at 6% per annum from finality until full payment. The CA decision was affirmed in toto.