G.R. No. L-2746 - Carino vs. Insular Government

The case involved nine criminal cases consolidated for trial – one for attempted rape (Criminal Case No. 118-07-2005) and eight for consummated rape (Criminal Cases Nos. 159-07-2005 to 166-07-2005).
The alleged crimes occurred between May 30, 2004 and December 28, 2004, with eight incidents of consummated rape and one attempted rape incident.

The accused, Vicente Candellada, was charged with raping his minor daughter, referred to as AAA, who was 14 years old at the time of the alleged incidents and 15 at trial.
The consummated rape charges involved allegations that on eight different occasions (May 30, June 2, June 12, July 10, August 13, November 5, December 15, and December 25, 2004), Candellada, through force, threats, and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of AAA.
The attempted rape charge claimed that on December 28, 2004, when AAA refused his advances, the accused, under the influence of liquor, lashed out violently by striking her with a piece of wood, rendering her unconscious.

During the pretrial conference, the defense conceded that Candellada was the father of the victim and that AAA was a minor.
The prosecution presented consistent and corroborative evidence including:

Direct testimony of AAA recounting the dates and nature of the incidents.
Testimonies from key witnesses such as Dr. Jovenal Magtagad (medical evidence of injuries), Elsie Gemina (owner of the house and eyewitness account of the living arrangements), and police personnel (SPO4 Bastigue and SPO3 Caroro) along with a DSWD officer.
Documentary evidence such as affidavits, sworn statements, joint affidavits, and a medical certificate establishing the nature and timeline of the injuries.

The defense relied primarily on Candellada’s testimony, in which he acknowledged his paternity and provided an alternate narrative that contradicted the victim’s account, including an uncorroborated alibi regarding his detention on December 23, 2004.

The RTC acquitted Candellada of the attempted rape charge due to insufficient evidence that the physical injuries constituted an attempted rape under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code.
For the eight counts of consummated rape, the RTC found AAA’s testimony credible and convincing, thereby convicting Candellada beyond reasonable doubt.
The RTC sentenced the accused to suffer the death penalty for each count of rape and imposed awards in moral and exemplary damages, along with orders for custody transfer for imprisonment.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC’s conviction for the eight counts of consummated rape and the acquittal on the attempt charge.
In modifying the sentence, the CA replaced the death penalty with reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole in accordance with Republic Act No. 9346, which prohibits the imposition of the death penalty.
The CA also increased the exemplary damages from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 per count and imposed an interest rate of 6% per annum on the aggregate damages from finality until full payment.

Whether AAA’s consistent and straightforward testimony, despite minor details that could be construed as rehearsed, was adequately credible to sustain a conviction for consummated rape.
The impact of her uniform recounting of the incidents on establishing the occurrence of the crime.

Whether the injuries sustained by AAA on December 28, 2004 were sufficient in severity to constitute an attempt to rape under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code.
The legal adequacy of concluding that the physical evidence did not support a rape attempt.

Whether Candellada’s uncorroborated alibi—that he was already in custody on December 23, 2004—could effectively counter the direct and categorical testimony of AAA and other witnesses.
The weight to be given to the general denial as compared to the positive and direct evidence presented by the prosecution.

Whether the substitution of the death penalty with reclusion perpetua (per Republic Act No. 9346) aligns with applicable statutory and jurisprudential standards.
How the adjustments in damages reflect the balancing of retributive justice and statutory mandates.