GR 94128; (February, 1993) (Digest)
G.R. No. 94128 February 3, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROSAURO SAN PEDRO alias BONG and JOHN DOE, accused-appellant.
FACTS
The Regional Trial Court of Bontoc, Mountain Province, convicted Rosauro San Pedro of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, with an order to indemnify the victim P30,000.00. The co-accused, John Doe, was not arrested. The prosecution’s principal witness, 18-year-old student Catherine Mata-ag, testified that San Pedro, a tricycle driver who had made several ignored overtures, abducted her at knifepoint on November 17, 1988. He dragged her into a tricycle, rendered her unconscious with a cloth, and when she awoke in a strange place, she was naked, in pain, with a sticky substance on her thighs, and realized she had been violated. Her brother, Angel Lapon, reported the incident to the police after finding her, and a medical examination by Dr. Imelda Pacheco confirmed vaginal lacerations and the presence of seminal fluid and spermatozoa. Another witness, Manolo Pao-ilan, testified to seeing the abduction under moonlight and electric lights and identified San Pedro. The defense presented an alibi, claiming San Pedro was drinking elsewhere and then slept at a friend’s house, corroborated by several witnesses. The defense also argued that the victim could not have identified her rapist as she was unconscious.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant, Rosauro San Pedro, of rape based on the evidence presented, particularly regarding his identification and the rejection of his alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. It held that the accused-appellant was positively identified by the complainant and an eyewitness, Pao-ilan, under sufficient lighting. The Court rejected the defense’s argument that the victim could not identify her rapist due to unconsciousness, stating that the identity of the rapist in such cases is determined by events preceding or following the loss of consciousness, such as the abduction by San Pedro. The Court found the alibi weak and intrinsically not credible, especially given the positive identification. It also noted that the defense failed to present additional evidence, like soil analysis, within the agreed timeframe. The crime committed was rape, which absorbed the forcible abduction as the intent to rape existed from the outset. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and indemnity were upheld.