GR 83811; (May, 1992) (Digest)
G.R. No. 83811 May 5, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAYMUNDO CRUZ, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Raymundo Cruz was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Pasig of the crime of rape committed against Carmelita Gantiga, a fourteen-year-old mental retardate, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The prosecution presented evidence that on January 19, 1980, in Pasig, Metro Manila, Cruz called the victim and her playmate, Melanie Garcia, into his house. Inside, he undressed Carmelita and ravished her on a bamboo bench while Melanie watched nearby. Cruz then threatened them not to report the incident. The victim’s mother, Lourdes Gantiga, learned of the rape four days later from Melanie Garcia. Medical examination by the NBI confirmed sexual contact. Dr. Manuel Celis testified that Carmelita was a mental retardate with an I.Q. comparable to a three to seven-year-old child. The defense presented an alibi, with Virgilio Bragat testifying that he and Cruz were fishing at sea from the morning of January 19 until the early morning of January 20. Ester Cruz, the appellant’s sister, also testified he was in Malabon. Melanie Garcia retracted her prosecution testimony, claiming she was bribed and coerced by Lourdes Gantiga to testify falsely. The trial court found the prosecution’s evidence credible and convicted Cruz.
ISSUE
1. Whether the guilt of the accused was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the trial court erred in imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision.
1. The guilt of the accused was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found the testimonies of the victim and the original testimony of Melanie Garcia credible and consistent. The retraction by Melanie Garcia was viewed with suspicion, as retractions are unreliable and easily obtained. The defense of alibi failed because it was not physically impossible for Cruz to be at the crime scene at the time of the incident, especially given the testimony of Melanie Garcia for the defense that she was at Cruz’s house conversing with him around 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. on January 19. Furthermore, the appellant waived any objection to the testimony regarding the victim’s mental condition by not cross-examining Dr. Celis.
2. The trial court did not err in imposing reclusion perpetua. Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for rape is reclusion perpetua, a single indivisible penalty that should be applied regardless of mitigating or aggravating circumstances.