Case Digest (G.R. No. 133237)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Ernesto Dizon y Ilarde, G.R. No. 133237, July 11, 2003, Supreme Court Second Division, Callejo, Sr., J., writing for the Court. Appellant Ernesto Dizon y Ilarde was prosecuted for rape upon the sworn complaint of a 14‑year‑old girl identified as AAA, the private complainant; the People of the Philippines was the appellee. The case arose from events of the night of May 11–12, 1996 in Barangay Malibay, Pasay City.On the evening of May 11, 1996, AAA and other youths were making banners for a fiesta and dispersed about 2:00 a.m. while walking home. AAA testified that she noticed appellant following her; as she passed the comfort room (CR) of appellant’s house, he embraced her from behind, covered her mouth, shoved her into the CR, forced her to lie on the wet concrete floor, pulled down her pants and panty, inserted his finger and then his penis into her vagina, and remained on top of her while “pumping” for about ten minutes; afterward he warned her not to tell anyone. AAA immediately returned home crying; her mother observed wet hair and clothes and AAA disclosed the rape. The incident was reported to barangay and police authorities, the appellant was arrested, and AAA submitted to a medico‑legal examination.
The medico‑legal report by Dr. Jesusa Vergara described congestion and abrasion of the vestibule and posterior fourchette, an elastic congested hymen with healed lacerations at 3 and 5 o’clock and a fresh laceration at 9 o’clock, moderate resistance to introduction of the examining finger, and a narrow vaginal canal; Dr. Vergara opined the fresh laceration and bloodstain on the panty were consistent with recent penetration and that absence of spermatozoa did not preclude sexual intercourse.
At the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasay City, Branch 110 (Decision dated March 16, 1998, penned by Judge Porfirio G. Macaraeg), appellant pleaded not guilty, testified that AAA was his consensual “sweetheart” and that they had agreed to meet at 2:00 a.m., and presented witnesses including his wife and a compadre; the defense suggested the physical findings could be explained by forcible fingernail injury or by the wife’s slap when she caught them. The RTC found AAA’s testimony credible, held that prosecution proved rape beyond reasonable doubt under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, and sentenced appellant to reclusion perpetua and ordered indemnity of P50,000.
Appellant filed a notice of appeal with the trial court and raised mainly that (1) the trial court relied merely on prosecution witnesses and failed to weigh evidence favorably to the accused, a...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in convicting appellant when the victim’s testimony allegedly contained inconsistencies and physical evidence allegedly negated forcible rape, such that proof beyond reasonable doubt was lacking?
- Should the RTC’s award of civil indemnity be modified to i...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)