G.R. No. 61128. March 12, 1984.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. ROLLIE DUMALAG, Defendant-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Rollie Dumalag was convicted of rape by the Court of First Instance of Davao and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The prosecution evidence established that on February 27, 1980, in San Isidro, Kaputian, Davao del Norte, 16-year-old Virginia Tagpuno was alone in her house when two men entered. One man, later identified as Dumalag, had a visible gold tooth and smiled at her. The other wore a mask. They gagged, blindfolded, and pinned her down, taking turns raping her. Her grandfather later found her and reported the crime. On March 5, 1980, Virginia identified Dumalag from a police lineup as one of her assailants, specifically noting his gold tooth.
Dumalag interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was in sitio Nabunturan within the same municipality committing robbery at noon that day. He also challenged his identification, demonstrating in court that he no longer had a gold tooth or denture. The trial court rejected his defense, crediting the victim’s positive identification and the medical findings of vaginal lacerations consistent with rape.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the identity of the appellant as one of the perpetrators of the rape beyond reasonable doubt, overcoming his defenses of alibi and mistaken identity.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the credibility of the victim’s identification and the weakness of the defense. First, the Court upheld the trial court’s finding that the victim’s identification was clear, explicit, and positive. Her immediate recognition of Dumalag in the police lineup, based on his distinctive gold tooth as observed during the assault, was deemed credible. The fact that Dumalag no longer had the gold tooth at trial was not exculpatory. The Court accepted police testimony that he had the gold tooth when apprehended and identified, noting it was a style in rural areas to use removable gold jackets on teeth. This suggested a deliberate attempt to alter his appearance post-identification.
Second, the defense of alibi was correctly dismissed. For alibi to prevail, the accused must demonstrate it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The Court noted the rape occurred around 10:00 a.m. in San Isidro, while the alleged robbery was at noon in sitio Nabunturan within the same small municipality. The two-hour interval made it physically possible to travel between the locations. Denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim, who had no improper motive to falsely accuse him. The medical evidence corroborated the fact of sexual intercourse through force. Thus, the totality of evidence sustained the judgment of conviction beyond reasonable doubt.