G.R. No. 142728 - People vs. Abano

The accused, Doroteo AbaAo, was charged with raping his six-year-old daughter, Judelyn AbaAo.
The alleged rape occurred on August 15, 1996, at around 11:30 p.m. in Barangay Liminangcong, Municipality of Taytay, Palawan.
The Information specified that the accused, with a lewd design and using force, threat, and intimidation, committed the crime against his daughter who did not consent.

The case was tried by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 52, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, which rendered a judgment on January 18, 2000.
The prosecution presented several key witnesses:

The victim, Judelyn AbaAo, whose direct and consistent testimony detailed the events.
Dr. Nestor A. Reyes, Chief of Taytay District Hospital, who testified about the presence of old healed hymenal lacerations consistent with the alleged rape.
Annabelle Fuentes, a neighbor, who corroborated the victim’s account by describing unusual circumstances including hearing Judelyn cry out for help.

Documentary evidence was submitted, including the medical certificate indicating the physical evidence of trauma on the victim.
The defense, on the other hand, presented only the accused’s testimony which was a blanket denial of the charge.
Additional circumstantial evidence included the victim’s detailed and emotive courtroom testimony, despite her tender age, as well as testimonies supporting her identification of her father as the rapist.

Under Republic Act No. 7659, amended by RA No. 8353 (Anti-Rape Law of 1997), rape committed against a minor—especially where the offender is the parent—is considered a heinous crime meriting the death penalty.
The law provided that if rape is committed upon a victim under eighteen years old by a person related as parent or guardian, the death penalty was an applicable accessory penalty.
The trial court found that evidence established the essential element of carnal knowledge—a crucial factor in determining the crime of rape even when the victim is below twelve years old.

The trial court found Doroteo AbaAo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of raping his daughter.
The court imposed the death penalty by lethal injection.
Additionally, it ordered the accused to pay damages to the victim:

The judgment detailed evidentiary findings including the victim’s direct eyewitness testimony, the corroborative physical evidence (healed hymenal lacerations), and the neighbor’s observations.

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.

The accused argued that the trial court misapplied the evidentiary principles in rape cases.
Specifically, he claimed:

The negligence in applying the three guiding principles in reviewing rape evidence.
That the victim’s testimony lacked consistency, particularly regarding her ability to identify him as the perpetrator.

Whether the inherent difficulties in proving rape due to its nature and the subjective reliability of a child witness were sufficiently addressed by the trial court.
Whether the trial court properly evaluated the corroborative evidence from physical findings and witness testimonies in light of the defense’s blanket denial.