Case Digest (G.R. No. 19495)
Facts:
On December 28, 1996, in Brgy. Bitan-agan, Butuan City, appellant Danilo Andrade was accused of raping AAA, a minor. The prosecution evidence showed that around 11:30 o’clock in the morning, while AAA was on her way home from the creek after washing clothes, she saw appellant seated under a star apple tree. As she walked past him, appellant allegedly pulled her left hand and dragged her toward the bushes. AAA, then thirteen (13) years old, shouted for help, but appellant covered her mouth, pointed a bolo at her, and warned her not to make noise. AAA struggled but was overpowered; appellant allegedly pushed her down, removed her clothing and panty, removed his own pants, placed himself on top of her, and inserted his penis into her vagina. AAA testified that she felt pain, told appellant to stop, but he continued until he was satisfied, after which he warned her not to tell anyone, otherwise he would kill her. AAA then immediately reported the incident to her mother, Nena Morales...Case Digest (G.R. No. 19495)
Facts:
Danilo Andrade appealed the April 16, 2001 Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Butuan City, Branch 4 in Criminal Case No. 7203, which convicted him of rape under Article 335, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659. The complaint, dated February 27, 1997, alleged that on or about the morning of December 28, 1996 in Brgy. Bitan-agan, Butuan City, he had carnal knowledge with AAA, a minor, through force and intimidation against her will.The prosecution presented AAA’s testimony that she was dragged to the bushes, her mouth was covered, a bolo was pointed at her to warn her not to make noise, and she was raped. It presented medical findings from Dr. Rhodora Gliceria Monton-Anino, who examined AAA the next day and found evidence consistent with sexual assault. The defense denied the accusation, claiming an alleged illicit relationship with AAA’s mother, and raised alibi and alleged inconsistencies, including the contents of the police blotter which reportedly did not initially mention rape.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in not rejecting the private complainant’s alleged implausible and conflicting testimony.
- Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused despite alleged lack of tenacious resistance by the complainant.
- Whether the trial court erred in not giving full faith and credence to the defense evidence, including the police blotter entries.
- Whether the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)