G.R. No. 143677 - People vs. Lachica y Llamas

On or about July 1, 1998, in Barangay Quezon, Municipality of Solano, Nueva Vizcaya, the accused, Benito Lachica y Llamas, is alleged to have committed the crime of rape.
The complainant, Sharmaine Lachica, a 5-year-old minor and niece of the accused, was reportedly playing near the accused’s residence when she was called inside his house.
According to the prosecution’s version, once inside the house, the accused unzipped his pants, placed Sharmaine either on his lap or on a chair, and inserted a hard object (referred to as a piece of wood) into her vagina.
The victim experienced pain and distress, during which the accused allegedly covered her mouth to prevent her from crying out.

After the assault, Sharmaine complained of pain in her private part, prompting her grandmother, Anita Lachica, to take notice.
Initial examinations by physicians (Dr. Cadiente-Remigio and later Dr. Rodriguez) detected physical injuries such as lacerations on the hymen at different “o’ clocks” (notably at 3:00 and 8:00), slight hematoma, and swelling of the genitalia.
Laboratory tests conducted on a greenish, foul-smelling discharge showed evidence of gonorrhea, a sexually transmitted infection known to occur only via sexual contact.

During trial, the complainant gave a detailed and emotionally charged testimony wherein she clearly identified the accused as her uncle and recounted the assault with precise details.
Her testimony included identifying the accused, describing the act of unzipping his pants, insertion of a hard object into her vagina, and the subsequent attempt to silence her by placing a hand over her mouth.
The trial court, giving full credence to her account, found the accused guilty of qualified rape, primarily on the basis of her positive, clear, and convincing testimony.
The Information filed by the prosecution indicated that the victim was below seven years old and noted the relationship between the accused and the victim; however, these allegations were later scrutinized for independent documentary confirmation.

The accused, a tricycle driver by profession, claimed that on the day of the incident he followed his regular routine and was engaged in transporting passengers after having lunch with his family.
He denied any abusive or sexual misconduct towards his niece, contending that he had never inflicted physical punishment on her.
The defense further argued that the prosecution failed to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, the victim’s true age and the specific qualifying relationship (i.e. relative by consanguinity within the third civil degree) required for the imposition of the death penalty.
At arraignment, the accused pleaded not guilty; however, the procedural course led the trial court to rule largely in favor of the victim’s testimony despite the defense’s recitation of alibi and denial.

Whether the prosecution properly alleged and proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that the victim’s minority and her specific relationship with the accused were such that they would qualify the offense as rape with qualifying circumstances.
Whether the allegation that the victim was below seven years of age was substantiated with independent, authentic documentary evidence (e.g., a birth certificate or equivalent).

Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty given the failure to specifically plead or prove both qualifying circumstances in the Information.
Whether the accused’s defense of denial and alibi, in light of the positive identification issues and evidentiary standards in rape cases, was properly assessed.