Case Digest (G.R. No. 185716)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Miguelito Malana y Lardisabay, G.R. No. 185716, September 29, 2010, Supreme Court First Division, Perez, J., writing for the Court.
The prosecution (People of the Philippines) charged accused-appellant Miguelito Malana y Lardisabay with two counts of qualified rape under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code (as amended by Republic Act No. 8353) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos, Bulacan, Branch 13 (Crim. Case Nos. 452-M-01 and 453-M-01). The Informations alleged that Malana had carnal knowledge of his daughter, AAA, then 12 years old, by means of force, threat and intimidation on two separate dates (June 2000 and December 10, 2000). Accused pleaded not guilty and the two cases were tried jointly.
At trial the prosecution presented the minor victim AAA and the medico-legal examiner. AAA testified in detail that she had been awakened in their single small 6x6 meter room on both occasions to find her father on top of her, who undressed her, mashed her breasts, held her neck, warned her not to report him, and inserted his penis into her vagina; she said these acts caused pain and embarrassment and that she delayed reporting because of threats. The medico-legal report recorded healed lacerations of the hymen and concluded the subject was in a non-virgin state physically. The defense presented the accused as its sole witness; he admitted paternity but denied the rape allegations, claiming he was away selling goods at the time and contending that AAA and her mother bore a grudge.
On September 4, 2006 the RTC convicted accused-appellant of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua in both cases, and ordered indemnity. Because of the penalty imposed the cases were subject to automatic review by the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's factual findings but modified the award of damages, granting moral damages of P75,000.00 in addition to other relief; it rendered its decision on December 21, 2007.
Accused-appellant filed a Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court within the reglementary period and submitted a supplemental brief; the prosecuti...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the appellate court err in affirming the trial court's credibility findings and conviction, i.e., should the Court disturb the trial court's assessment of the complainant's testimony?
- Were the qualifying circumstances of victim's minority and relationship to the offender sufficiently alleged and proved to support conviction for qualified rape under Article 266-B?
- What damages are properly awarded to the victim upon conviction for...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)