Case Digest (G.R. No. 207983)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Percival Gecomo y Osit, G.R. Nos. 115035-36, February 23, 1996, Supreme Court Second Division, Regalado, J., writing for the Court.The People (plaintiff-appellee) charged accused-appellant Percival Gecomo y Osit with two counts of rape in Criminal Cases Nos. 92-108024 and 92-108025 before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 8, Manila, based on amended complaints sworn to by Regina Rapuzon y Fuenteblanca. The informations alleged forcible carnal knowledge on or about June 20, 1992 and July 3, 1992, respectively, by means of a knife, physical violence and intimidation. Appellant pleaded not guilty; the cases were consolidated and tried jointly.
At trial the complainant testified that on June 20, 1992 appellant accosted her on the street, held a knife wrapped in a handkerchief to her side, led her to the Mansion Hotel, slapped her, forced her to remove her dress, rendered her unconscious twice, and had sexual intercourse with her. She said appellant later sent her home at dawn and reported to work the same evening, where she again saw him. On July 3, 1992 she alleged a similar interception, forced entry into appellant’s house near Central Market, repeated rapes, being tied and gagged with masking tape, and a warning not to tell anyone. Her mother noticed injuries the next morning, and they reported the incident to police.
An NBI medico-legal report by Dr. Louella I. Nario (Living Case No. MG-92-570, July 6, 1992) recorded an abrasion on the right cheek and a healing hymenal laceration at the 9 o’clock position; the doctor concluded the genital findings were compatible with sexual intercourse about the alleged dates, and testified that extragenital injuries may be indicative of force though hymenal laceration alone does not necessarily establish force.
Appellant testified he and Regina were sweethearts and that the sexual acts were consensual, occurring in a Pension Apartelle and on other outings; he presented photographs and the testimony of co-worker Melanie Duran to show an affectionate relationship. The trial transcript also reflected inconsistent answers by appellant on dates and events. Different judges presided at hearings; the decision was authored by Judge Willelmo C. Fortun pursuant to Administrative Order No. 68-92. On March 7, 1994 the RTC convicted appellant in both cases, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering P50,000 indemnity in each case.
Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning errors that the trial court gave full credence to uncorroborated and inconsisten...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- May a judge who did not personally preside at trial render the decision in the case?
- Was the trial court correct to discuss and rely on a sworn statement (Exhibit H) that was marked but never formally offered in evidence (Section 34, Rule 132)?
- Can conviction for rape rest on the uncorroborated testimony of the victim here, given alleged inconsistencies, delay in reporting, and the victim’s conduct after the incidents?
- Did appellant’s testimony and supporting evidence sufficiently establish that the sexua...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)