G.R. No. 228595 - De Castro vs. Commission on Audit

Appellant Rolando Bautista Iroy is a widower and a fish ball vendor who rented a room in the house of prosecution witness Jojo Sarmiento.
Appellant resided in the room with his daughter AAA and his son BBB.

On May 31, 2004, at approximately 8:30 p.m., while Jojo Sarmiento was using the restroom, he noticed that the partition wall (which also divided appellant’s room) was shaking.
Sarmiento peeped through a hole in the partition and witnessed appellant in a compromising position with his daughter AAA:

Appellant’s shorts were pushed down to his knees, exposing him.
AAA was completely naked.
The sexual act was carried out in a standing position with AAA pushing against appellant’s advances.

After the act, appellant ordered his daughter to dress, displaying no remorse for his actions.

The following day, Sarmiento reported the observed incident to his Zone Leader, Evelyn Geraldino, urging her to notify the police.
On June 1, 2004, Geraldino communicated the incident to the Municipality’s Public Order and Safety Officer, Abdon C. Lozano, who then verified the facts upon visiting the premises.
AAA, when confronted by Lozano, admitted that the rape occurred on both May 15, 2004, and May 31, 2004, and revealed that her father had threatened to kill her if she resisted.
Medico-Legal Officer Dr. Paul Ed dela Cruz Ortiz confirmed the non-virgin state of AAA.

Based on the evidence, the prosecution filed an Information on June 2, 2004, charging appellant with qualified rape under paragraph 1(a), Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, with qualifying circumstances including:

Relationship (father-daughter)
Minority (AAA being 14 years old at the time of the incidents)
Aggravating circumstances such as nighttime, dwelling, and abuse of superior strength.

A second similar Information was also filed, differing only in the date of the alleged offense (May 31, 2004).

The testimony of Sarmiento was unreliable or motivated by personal animosity.
The act of sexual intercourse in a standing position was highly improbable unless both parties consented.

He further argued that AAA’s failure to immediately report the incident to family or authorities indicated that there was no rape per se.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 69, Pasig City, convicted appellant of qualified rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, also ordering payment of ₱75,000.00 as moral damages for AAA.
The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed with modification the RTC decision by:

Whether the testimonies of Sarmiento and victim AAA, along with the physical findings, were sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt the occurrence of qualified rape.
Whether the evidence sufficiently demonstrated that appellant used his moral and physical ascendancy to coerce his daughter into submission.

Whether the appellate court should give deference to the trial court’s findings regarding the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly Sarmiento.
Whether the lack of physical resistance or outcry by the victim negates the sexual assault charge given the presence of intimidation and threats.

Whether sexual intercourse in a standing position under the circumstances was indeed physically improbable as argued by the appellant.
Whether the proposition of improbability affects the determination of consent given the victim’s young age and the coercive context.

Whether the award of moral damages as determined by the RTC and modified by the CA is appropriate given the inherent nature of rape as an offense causing moral injury.
Whether the imposition of exemplary damages should be revised (increased from ₱25,000.00 to the advocated ₱30,000.00) to serve as a deterrent and a public example.