Case Digest (G.R. No. 106233)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Robinson Estrera, G.R. No. 106233, January 29, 1998, the Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court. The appeal arose from a June 1, 1992 decision of the Regional Trial Court of Danao City (Branch 25), which convicted accused-appellant Robinson Estrera of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to indemnify complainant Ester Mistula (Estrera) in the amount of P40,000.00.The information charged that on or about May 1, 1991 at around 10:00 a.m. in Sitio Pacijan, Barangay San Isidro, Municipality of San Francisco, Cebu, accused, by means of force and intimidation and with a knife, had carnal knowledge of Ester Mistula against her will and without her consent. At trial, Ester testified she was seized, threatened with a knife, stripped of shorts and panties, thrown to the ground, held by the knees, and that accused inserted his penis into her vagina and remained for a prolonged time; she said she bled afterward and only reported the incident on May 16, 1991 after learning accused had tried to molest her younger sister Rosie.
Medical examiner Dr. Leah S. Celestial testified that, when examined 14 days after the alleged incident, Ester had healed hymenal lacerations at the 3, 6 and 9 o'clock positions but no abrasions or hematomas. Rosie Mistula corroborated that accused twice tried to force her to go with him and claimed an older sister had been raped by accused in 1990. Rudileo Mistula testified that accused’s wife allegedly offered to settle the case. Police testimony recounted the tracing and arrest of accused on June 5, 1991 in Cebu City.
Accused denied the charge and maintained the intercourse was consensual — describing prior trysts (April 27 and May 5, 1991) and presenting his wife Alice (also spelled Alicia/Alice in the record) as corroborating the existence of an ...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the prosecution able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused had carnal knowledge of the complainant and that it was accomplished through force or intimidation as required by Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code?
- Was the lone testimony of the complainant, given the delay in reporting, the lack of physical injuries on examination, alleged inconsistencies and the circumstances recounted at trial, sufficient to sustain...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)