Title
People vs. Batula
Case
G.R. No. 181699
Decision Date
Nov 28, 2012
Batula was found guilty of rape due to credible testimony and medical evidence, resulting in a sentence of reclusion perpetua to death and monetary damages to the victim.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 181699)

Facts:

  • Jerry Batula, also known as "Cesar," was accused of raping a nine-year-old girl, referred to as AAA.
  • The incident occurred on April 26, 2002, at approximately 7:00 A.M. in Barangay Canano, Hinabangan, Samar.
  • AAA was with her parents, BBB and CCC, at their farm when she was instructed to fetch a lighter from their nipa hut.
  • On her way back, AAA encountered Batula, who asked for directions and subsequently followed her.
  • Batula threatened AAA with a bladed weapon called an "asundanga," forced her to undress, and raped her despite her cries for help.
  • The assault was interrupted when CCC called for AAA, prompting Batula to flee.
  • After the incident, AAA informed her father about the rape, leading to a search for Batula.
  • Witness Samuel Labanda saw Batula fleeing the scene, naked and armed with a bolo.
  • A medical examination by Dr. Felino Gualdrapa confirmed signs of rape, including lacerations and blood.
  • Batula was arraigned on October 17, 2002, and pleaded not guilty.
  • The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Calbiga, Samar, found him guilty of rape on December 10, 2003, sentencing him to death by lethal injection and ordering him to pay damages to AAA.
  • The case was elevated to the Court of Appeals, which modified the sentence to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole under Republic Act No. 9346.
  • Batula appealed to the Supreme Court, questioning the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses and the sufficiency of evidence.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, upholding Batula's conviction for rape and the modified penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole.
  • The Court found no merit in Batu...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court highlighted that the trial court is best positioned to assess the credibility of witnesses based on their demeanor and conduct during testimony.
  • AAA's testimony was deemed straightforward and credible, supported by witness Labanda's account and medical evidence.
  • Minor inconsistencies in testimonies were not seen as undermining overall credibility, especially when unrelated to the c...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.