Case Digest (G.R. No. 85822)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Ronilo Alburo, G.R. No. 85822, April 26, 1990, Supreme Court Second Division, Melencio-Herrera, J., writing for the Court. The Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch XIX (opinion penned by Leoncio P. Abarquez) convicted Ronilo Alburo of forcible abduction with rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordered indemnity to Evelyn Cantina, and imposed costs; the case was appealed to the Supreme Court.On 3 February 1986 Evelyn Cantina filed a complaint for forcible abduction with rape against Ronilo Alburo, Zaldy Rodriguez and John Doe (later identified as Dionisio Sumalinog). The affidavit alleged that on 27 January 1986 Alburo, driving a jeepney, invited Evelyn and two classmates to ride; Evelyn sat beside the driver. At traffic lights the classmates attempted to pull Evelyn from the jeepney but were prevented; the jeepney then proceeded through several streets, Rodriguez and Sumalinog later alighted, and Alburo allegedly drew a knife, threatened Evelyn, drove her to an isolated area (Beverly Hills/Capitol Hills), pushed her head against the steering wheel rendering her unconscious and thereafter had carnal knowledge of her against her will.
At trial the prosecution presented eyewitness testimony from Evelyn and her classmates, testimony about the search conducted by family and neighbors, physical exhibits (the knife, torn skirt and panty with bloodstains), and a medical certificate from Dr. Juliet Lastimosa stating fresh lacerations on the vagina and positive presence of spermatozoa. Toward the end of the prosecution’s case, the complaint against Rodriguez and Sumalinog was dismissed; trial proceeded only against Alburo, who pleaded not guilty.
Appellant presented five defense witnesses and documentary exhibits to support his theory that he and Evelyn were sweethearts and that any sexual intercourse was consensual. The trial court disbelieved the defense and found Alburo guilty of forcible abduction with rape; he was sentenced to reclusion perpetua, ordered to indemnify Evelyn P10,000 as moral ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in crediting the complainant’s testimony and in convicting appellant on that basis?
- Was the sexual act consensual because appellant and Evelyn were lovers, thus negating rape?
- Did the evidence establish the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape beyond reasonable doubt under Article 48 in relation to Articles 335 and ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)