G.R. No. 90257 May 21, 1993
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Cesar Cervantes, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Marivic Ortega, an eleven-year-old girl, and her family had been renting a room in the house of the accused-appellant’s mother for over three years. On the night of November 29, 1987, while Marivic, her mother, and brother were asleep, her father and Cesar Cervantes had a drinking session. After her drunk father retired, Marivic was awakened by a hand touching her breast. Cervantes held her down on a sofa, forcibly removed her underwear, inserted a finger into her vagina, and mashed her breast. He threatened to kill her if she made a noise. He then placed himself on top of her and inserted his penis into her vagina, causing her extreme pain. Cervantes continued to threaten her afterwards. On December 3, 1987, when Cervantes tried to molest her again, Marivic hit him with a broomstick, witnessed by Anita Gabatino. This incident prompted Marivic to disclose the rape to her parents. She was brought to the authorities and examined on December 7, 1987, which revealed healed lacerations on her hymen. Cesar Cervantes was convicted of rape by the Regional Trial Court and sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to indemnify the victim P25,000.00.

ISSUE

Whether the Regional Trial Court erred in convicting accused-appellant Cesar Cervantes of the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the indemnity. The Court found no merit in the appeal. It held that: (1) the alleged inconsistency regarding the timing of the rape and the drinking session was a mere estimate and not a precise chronology, and the victim clarified the rape occurred after her father was asleep; (2) the small size of the room did not negate the rape, as the victim was silenced by threats and rape can be consummated quickly and stealthily; (3) minor inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony (e.g., being boxed versus merely threatened) do not impair her essential credibility, and force or intimidation need not be proven for a victim under twelve; (4) the medical findings of lacerations were consistent with rape, as the slightest penetration suffices and the absence of extensive abrasions does not rule it out; (5) the delay in reporting was sufficiently explained by the accused’s threats and the victim’s natural reluctance, and the record shows she reported it in early December 1987, not January 1988; (6) the motive suggested by the defense (ejectment due to non-payment of rent) was rejected. The Court affirmed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and increased the civil indemnity to P30,000.00.