Case Digest (G.R. No. 136337)
Facts:
Nelson Cabuntog was charged with rape for alleged carnal knowledge of Edna Durero by means of force and intimidation, allegedly occurring on or about 6 May 1995 in Surigao City. Durero was a deaf-mute househelper of Vevencia Pareja, and she testified using signs to recount that Cabuntog dragged and pulled her, pushed her against a wall, touched her private parts, and succeeded in having sexual intercourse.The Regional Trial court of Surigao City, Branch 30, found Cabuntog guilty beyond reasonable doubt and imposed an indeterminate penalty with moral and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua and increased the moral damages, prompting the accused to appeal to the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in finding that Cabuntog had carnal knowledge of the victim by force and against her will and consent.
- Whether the evidence proved Cabuntog’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling:
The Sup Case Digest (G.R. No. 136337)
Facts:
- Criminal charge and plea
- People of the Philippines charged Nelson Cabuntog with multiple rape through an Information alleging that on or about 6 May 1995 in the City of Surigao, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of the trial court, the accused, “conspiring, confederating together and mutually helping with another,” by means of force and intimidation, did “take turns in having carnal knowledge of the undersigned against her will and without her consent.”
- Cabuntog pleaded Not Guilty, and trial proceeded.
- Prosecution evidence on the incident
- The prosecution evidence showed that Edna Durero was a househelper of Vevencia Pareja and that Durero was a deaf-mute.
- Vevencia Pareja testified that in the evening of 05 May 1995, she tended her 24-hour sari-sari store and barbeque grill at Luneta Park, Borromeo St., Surigao City, and she was being helped by her granddaughter Gingging Uyan and by Durero.
- At the dawn of 06 May 1995, Cabuntog and three companions arrived, ordered drinks and barbeque, and Pareja prepared the “puso.”
- Pareja asked Durero to rekindle the charcoal for the grill.
- Pareja noticed that Cabuntog went near Durero and brushed his body against hers.
- After a while, Pareja decided to check on Durero, but Durero could not be found.
- Cabuntog and one companion, identified as Bobbit, were likewise missing.
- The charcoal was not rekindled.
- Pareja asked Gingging to look for Durero; Gingging returned unsuccessful.
- Pareja directed Gingging to look at the Arnoldus Pastoral Office; Gingging again returned without finding Durero or Cabuntog, but reported the gate to the pastoral office was open.
- Pareja sent Gingging again; this time Gingging reported that she saw Durero, Cabuntog, and Bobbit getting out of the pastoral office.
- When Durero, Cabuntog, and Bobbit returned to the store, Pareja immediately asked where Durero had gone.
- Through signs, Durero conveyed that she was pulled by Cabuntog and taken to the pastoral office.
- In the pastoral office, Durero was pushed against the wall and molested by Cabuntog.
- Durero testified in court using signs.
- Durero’s testimony disclosed that on 06 May 1995, between three and four o’clock in the morning, Cabuntog dragged and pulled her, pushed her against the wall, touched her private parts, and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her.
- Medical testimony
- Dr. Desiree Chong, the medical officer who examined Durero, testified that she did not find any signs of abrasion or contusion on Durero’s body.
- Dr. Chong also testified that the smear of vaginal fluid taken from Durero tested positive for the presence of spermatozoa.
- Defense evidence
- Cabuntog testified that on 06 May 1995 at about four o’clock in the morning, he was in his house in Barangay Guadas, Dinagat, Surigao del Norte, preparing the pukot (fish net) he would use for fishing.
- Cabuntog stated that he saw their Barangay Captain, Samson Camposano, who was going to the seashore to buy fish.
- Cabuntog claimed that he went fishing that morning and, according to him, for the whole month of May.
- Cabuntog stated that he needed money because his wife had just given birth.
- Samson Camposano corroborated Cabuntog’s testimony: at around four o’clock in the morning of 06 May 1995, he saw Cabuntog first while the accused was preparing his fishnet and later as Cabuntog was about to leave for the sea.
- Camposano was about five meters away from Cabuntog’s house.
- Camposano testified that he was sure it was the accused because the house was illuminated by a wick lamp.
- Trial court ruling
- The Regional Trial Court found Cabuntog guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape as defined and penalized under Section 11, Republic Act No. 7659.
- The trial court sentenced Cabuntog ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Credibility and competency of the deaf-mute rape victim as a witness
- Whether the trial court erred in admitting and relying on the testimony of a deaf-mute victim who communicated through signs and signals.
- Sufficiency of evidence proving rape by force and intimidation, against the victim’s will and without consent
- Whether the trial court gravely erred in finding that Cabuntog had carnal knowledge by means of force and intimidation, and against the victim’s will and consent.
- Sufficiency of evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt
- Whether the trial court gravely erred in finding Cabuntog guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.
- Effect of absence of external injuries on the victim
- Whether the absence of abrasion or contusion on the victim’s body negated the victim’s claim of having been dragged, pulled, and assaulted.
- Whether resistance was required and, if none was offered, whether consent could be inferred.
- Effectiveness of the defense of alibi
- Whether Cabuntog’s alibi established reasonable doubt, considering the time and circumstan...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)