Case Digest (G.R. No. 241249)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Ryan Fetalco y Sablay, G.R. No. 241249, July 28, 2020, the Supreme Court First Division, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.
The prosecution charged Ryan Fetalco y Sablay (accused-appellant) by an Information dated February 24, 2006 with rape for allegedly having carnal knowledge of AAA, a four-year-old girl, on or about July 17, 2005. During arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty.
At trial the prosecution presented three witnesses: AAA (the private complainant), her mother BBB, and P/Supt. Dr. Ruby Grace Sabino-Dingson (a Medico-Legal Officer). Six days after the incident, on July 23, 2005, the child executed a Sinumpaang Salaysay stating that the accused inserted in her vagina his “hairy male organ” which she described as resembling a “daga.” In subsequent courtroom testimony in 2007–2010 AAA described seeing bleeding and told of objects inserted in her vagina; at different times she referred to the object as a “daga,” as a fishball stick, and on one occasion did not mention bleeding. Her mother BBB testified that the child described the object as the accused’s penis and placed the incident at the accused’s house. The Medico-Legal Report (Medico Legal Report No. M-2760-05 dated July 23, 2005) indicated shallow healed hymenal lacerations consistent with penetrating trauma; the examining physician who prepared the report (Dr. Carpio) did not personally testify at trial and a different medico-legal officer and custodian of records testified as to the report.
The accused denied the charges, claiming alibi and asserting that the accusation stemmed from a rental dispute; he said he was at his brother’s house (one house away) at the time and did not corroborate his alibi with the cousins he claimed were with him.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 169, convicted the accused of Statutory Rape in a decision dated May 18, 2016, finding the child’s testimony credible despite some inconsistencies and relying also on the medico-legal report; the RTC sentenced the accused to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and ordered indemnities and damages (civil indemnity P75,000; moral damages P75,000; exemplary damages P30,000). The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA, in a decision promulgated February 28, 2018, affirmed the conviction but modified the awards, sustaining the finding that all elements of statutory rape were proven and holding that the victim’s te...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in giving full credence to the allegedly inconsistent testimonies of the private complainant AAA and her mother BBB?
- Was the element of sexual intercourse (carnal knowledge) as alleged in the Information proved beyond reasonable doubt?
- Was the medico-legal report inadmissible or insufficient evidence because the medico-legal officer who prepared it did not testify in court?
- Did the trial court err in discoun...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)