GR 97525; (April, 1993) (Digest)
G.R. No. 97525 . April 7, 1993.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOEL SARTAGODA y BOCANEGRA, JIMMY BASCUÑA y LAZARTE, VICENTE STA. ANA y GUTIERREZ and JOHN DOE, accused-appellants.
FACTS
On the evening of July 2, 1988, accused-appellants broke into the house of Rogelio de Belen in Calamba, Laguna. They tied Rogelio up, poked a knife at him, and demanded the key to his cabinet. In another room, they approached Rogelio’s sister, Vilma de Belen, who was pretending to be asleep. They covered her mouth, poked a knife at her neck, and threatened to kill her if she made noise. They raised her blouse, removed her underwear, and tied her hands. Accused Jimmy Bascuña first raped her while Vicente Sta. Ana held her legs apart. Vicente Sta. Ana then took his turn, followed by Joel Sartagoda. After the multiple rape, the accused left, taking money and personal belongings. Vilma lost consciousness due to shock. The incident was reported, and a medical examination revealed fresh lacerations on her hymen. The Regional Trial Court convicted all three accused of robbery with multiple rape. They appealed, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt, citing a negative fingerprint examination report and the lack of a police line-up.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellants despite the alleged failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modifications. The Court held:
1. The negative finding in the fingerprint examination does not prove the accused were not at the crime scene. Identifiable latent prints require smooth surfaces and specific conditions; their absence does not eliminate the possibility of presence.
2. A police line-up is not required by law for proper identification. The victim had ample opportunity to see her attackers during the crime, and her positive identification at trial was credible.
3. Non-flight does not prove innocence. While unexplained flight may indicate guilt, the absence of flight does not establish innocence, especially when there is overwhelming evidence of guilt.
4. The factual findings of the trial court are entitled to the highest respect and were firmly grounded on the evidence.
5. Regarding civil liability, due to conspiracy, the accused are held solidarily liable to indemnify Vilma de Belen P90,000.00 for the multiple rape (P30,000.00 for each of the three rapes).
6. The trial court’s order for each accused to “recognize the offspring if there be any” was deleted, as in multiple rape, it is impossible to determine paternity, and no accused can be required to recognize the offspring.