GR 249500; (December, 2021) (Digest)
G.R. No. 249500 , December 06, 2021
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. PO2 RHYAN CONCEPCION Y ARGUELLES, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
FACTS
Accused-appellant PO2 Rhyan Concepcion was charged with rape of AAA, a 14-year-old minor, on or about May 2, 2013, in Pasig City. The prosecution established that accused-appellant, a police officer, met AAA on April 2, 2013, at a barangay hall, obtained her phone number, and subsequently courted her, visiting her home and gaining the trust of her aunt, BBB. In the early morning of May 2, 2013, after persistent calls, AAA went to accused-appellant’s office at the Police Community Precinct. Upon arrival, after a fellow officer left, accused-appellant turned off the lights, pushed AAA onto a sofa, removed her clothing and his own, and had carnal knowledge with her against her will. AAA resisted and shouted, but a radio was playing loudly. She felt threatened by accused-appellant’s gun on the table and feared for her safety. The act lasted about 30 minutes. AAA immediately reported the incident to BBB. A medico-legal examination yielded negative for spermatozoa. The defense presented alibi and denial, claiming accused-appellant was elsewhere during the incident. The Regional Trial Court found accused-appellant guilty of rape. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the damages awarded.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming accused-appellant’s conviction for the crime of rape.
RULING
The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the Decision of the Court of Appeals with MODIFICATION to the award of damages. The Court held that all elements of rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code were proven beyond reasonable doubt: (1) AAA was 14 years old; (2) accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of her; and (3) it was done through force, threat, or intimidation. AAA’s credible, candid, and consistent testimony, corroborated by BBB’s account and the medico-legal findings, sufficiently established the crime. The defense of alibi and denial cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court found that accused-appellant employed moral ascendancy and intimidation, abusing his position as a police officer, and that AAA’s failure to immediately shout for help or escape was reasonable given the circumstances, including her fear and the threat posed by his firearm. The award of damages was modified in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.