Case Digest (G.R. No. 252861)
Facts:
On February 27, 2008, in San Jose City, fourteen-year-old AAA was accosted by accused-appellant Alexander Olpindo y Reyes, who, with force and intimidation, abducted her aboard his tricycle, took her to an isolated area, tied her hands, and forcibly had sexual intercourse. AAA reported the assault to her aunt the next day. On October 6, 2008, an information for rape under Article 266-A(1)(a) in relation to Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code and R.A. No. 7610 was filed, but Reyes evaded arrest until December 4, 2012. He pleaded not guilty at arraignment. At trial, the prosecution presented AAA’s testimony and the medico-legal report of Dr. Janine Duran, while the defense offered Reyes’s alibi and “sweetheart theory” through his testimony and that of Fedelita Colorena. The Regional Trial Court of San Jose City (Branch 38) rendered its decision on December 1, 2016, convicting Reyes of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua with awards of civil indemnity, moral and exempCase Digest (G.R. No. 252861)
Facts:
- Indictment and Trial Proceedings
- On October 6, 2008, appellant Alexander Olpindo y Reyes was charged with rape of “AAA,” a 14-year-old minor, allegedly committed on February 27, 2008 in San Jose City; he eluded arrest until December 4, 2012, pleaded not guilty, and faced trial.
- Prosecution evidence: AAA and her sister were stopped by appellant and his sister Mary Ann; AAA was forced into the tricycle, taken to an uninhabited area, tied, and raped; she reported the next day; Dr. Janine Duran’s medico-legal exam (Exh. B) showed multiple abrasions and hymenal laceration.
- Defense Evidence
- Appellant testified that AAA was his consensual girlfriend of five months; on February 27, he merely brought AAA and her sister home by tricycle; he denied rape and claimed prior consensual intercourse.
- Defense witness Fedelita Colorena corroborated the consensual relationship, stating AAA boarded willingly and appeared happy.
- Rulings Below
- RTC (Dec. 1, 2016): convicted appellant of rape under Art. 266-A(1) RPC, imposed reclusion perpetua, and awarded P50,000 civil indemnity, P50,000 moral damages, P30,000 exemplary damages.
- CA (Nov. 22, 2019): noted no notice of appeal, treated RTC decision as final but reviewed on merits per People v. Mateo, affirmed conviction and damages.
Issues:
- Did the CA err in convicting despite alleged inconsistencies and incredibility of AAA’s testimony?
- Was there a conclusive finding of rape under Art. 266-A RPC?
- Did the CA improperly disregard appellant’s denial and alibi and rely solely on the prosecution?
- Is automatic review under Rule 122 applicable despite R.A. No. 9346 abolishing the death penalty?
- What is the proper mode of appeal for reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment cases, and the role of certiorari?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)