Case Digest (G.R. No. L-37792)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Leonardo Maala alias Narding, G.R. No. L-37792, June 24, 1983, the Supreme Court En Banc, Aquino, J., writing for the Court.The prosecution charged Leonardo Maala (accused-appellant) with rape for an incident that occurred in the early morning of August 17, 1971, at the house of Elena Maala (the offended party), then 16 years old, in Barrio Mataas na Bayan, Lemery, Batangas. According to Elena, she was awakened at about three o’clock by a person on top of her whom she identified as Maala, a neighbor and married man armed with a gun. He covered her mouth, threatened to shoot her if she resisted, struck her shoulder with the gun, groped her breasts, tore her dress and removed her panty, and had carnal knowledge of her. She lost consciousness from the pain and was later found by her sister. Elena narrated the incident in a sworn statement and reported it to the Constabulary that same morning (Exh. C).
A medical examination on August 17, 1971, revealed fresh lacerations of the hymen at the 5 and 9 o’clock positions with slight congestion, mucoid discharge at the vaginal orifice, and contusions on both cheeks, breasts and the right shoulder; the examining physician testified the hymenal lacerations were caused within twenty-four hours of the exam (Exh. E). Elena said this was her first sexual intercourse and that Maala was not her friend.
Maala, 19, admitted having sexual intercourse with Elena but maintained it was consensual, asserting she was his sweetheart and claiming it was the seventh time they had intercourse; he alleged the mother forced Elena to file the complaint. He testified that he showed Elena’s mother a diary to prove their relationship, but the diary was not offered in evidence and was not shown lost or destroyed.
The Court of First Instance of Batangas, Balayan, Branch VII (Judge Jaime de los Angeles) found the defense fabricated, credited the prosecution evidence, convicted Maala of qualified rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua (Criminal Case No. 232). The trial court omitted awarding moral indem...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the guilt of accused-appellant proven beyond reasonable doubt?
- Did the facts establish qualified rape and the proper punishment?
- Should an indemnity be imposed on the accused under Article 345, Revised Pen...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)