G.R. No. 123599 - People vs. Flores y Velista

The accused, Agapito Flores y Velista, is the common-law spouse of Rosario Flores and the father of Ma. Cristina, the eldest of their four children.
They reside at 168 Road 1, Bagong Pag-asa, Quezon City, where the family lived under conditions typical of lower-class households.

On the evening of November 7, 1994, a quarrel erupted between Agapito and Rosario Flores over issues such as non-payment of rentals and other domestic matters.
As a result of the altercation, Rosario was beaten by Agapito, prompting her to leave the house and seek refuge at a neighbor's home.

In the morning, while Rosario was still absent, the accused ordered all children to leave the house except for Ma. Cristina.
He called Ma. Cristina into a bedroom under the guise of having something to tell her.
Once inside the room, the accused:

The assault proceeded with the accused undressing himself, kissing her, sucking her breast, and then inserting his private part into her vagina while she lay on a "papag" (a traditional cot).
The entire assault lasted for approximately one hour as the accused maintained the threat of the knife pointed at her.

Ma. Cristina’s testimony detailed the entire episode with corroboration through her emotional demeanor and the physical evidence of healed lacerations on her hymen at the 3:00, 7:00, and 9:00 positions.
Her account included prior abuses, having endured similar incidents when she was in Grade IV.
Medical examination by Dr. Rosaline Casidone confirmed the presence of healed lacerations but did not show signs of fresh external injuries, a fact argued by appellant as indicative of pre-existing conditions.

The accused claimed that the events arose out of a domestic quarrel and denied using force or coercion, maintaining that the allegation was fabricated by Rosario out of jealousy and revenge.
He further argued that inconsistencies in Ma. Cristina’s testimony undermined her credibility.
The arrest occurred after Rosario returned home and reported the incident to the authorities, with the barangay tanod apprehending him at the scene upon discovering Ma. Cristina.

The case, originally tried in the Regional Trial Court, resulted in a conviction and a sentence imposing the death penalty.
On automatic review by the appellate court, Atty. Roberto Abad, representing the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), raised issues regarding the sufficiency of the evidence and the propriety of the death penalty under RA 7659.
Appellant’s arguments included challenges to the evidentiary basis of her testimony, citing discrepancies between her court testimony and her sworn statement, and questioning the reliability of medical evidence.

Whether the evidence presented, particularly the victim’s testimony and corroborative medical findings, was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the inconsistencies noted between Ma. Cristina's courtroom testimony and her sworn statement undermine the reliability of her account.

Whether the discrepancies in the victim’s narrative affect the overall credibility of her testimony in establishing the occurrence of rape.
Whether the testimony of ancillary witnesses in the case substantiates the main testimony of Ma. Cristina.

Whether the rule regarding sufficiency of evidence in rape cases, and its application by the trial court, infringes on the accused’s constitutional right to the presumption of innocence.
Whether the evidence supports imposing the aggravated punishment of death given that the information did not include the qualifying relationship required by Section 11 of RA 7659.

Whether the award of indemnity and moral damages to Ma. Cristina, as stipulated in precedents for rape cases, is proper and mandatory.

Whether the court should consider recommending executive clemency given that strict enforcement of RA 7659 might result in an excessive penalty.