Case Digest (G.R. No. L-48362)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Fernando Rafanan, G.R. No. L-48362, February 28, 1990, Supreme Court Third Division, Feliciano, J., writing for the Court. Fernando Rafanan appealed a conviction by the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija dated February 27, 1978 for the crime of rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code; the trial court sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordered indemnity of P5,000 as moral damages, required him to acknowledge and support the offspring, and awarded costs.On July 31, 1974 Filomena Angala filed a sworn complaint alleging that on or about February 9–10, 1974 in Cabanatuan City Rafanan entered her mosquito net, pointed a short firearm at her, threatened her, struck and rendered her unconscious, and thereafter had sexual intercourse with her against her will. Rafanan pleaded not guilty at arraignment. After trial the CFI found the complainant credible and convicted Rafanan as recited above.
At trial Filomena testified to the assault and to subsequent pregnancy and childbirth; a police medico-legal officer (1st Lt. Desiderio A. Moraleda) examined her in May 1974 and reported findings compatible with a 2–3 months’ pregnancy and positive Garvindex test though smears were negative for spermatozoa. Rafanan offered alibi testimony: he said he was at the Philippine Wesleyan College preparing streamers the night in question and his wife Emma corroborated that Filomena left the house on February 8. The prosecution countered with two college security guards, Bonifacio Mangahas and Rolando Wycoco, who testified from the guards’ logbook that Rafanan left the campus at about 10:30 p.m. on February 9 and returned at about 7:10 a.m. on February 10; the Rafanans’ house lay roughly 600 meters from the college compound.
Rafanan raised multiple assignments of error on appeal: that the trial court failed properly to weigh facts favoring acquittal; that unreliable evidence (the guards’ logbook) destroyed his alibi; that there was no valid proof he fathered the child; that he was improperly denied presentation of additional witnesses; that consent had not been disproved; and that the penalty and the order to acknowledge and support the offspring were excessive. The defense also filed a Motion Waiving Further Evidence and Resting Case in the tri...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the conviction of Fernando Rafanan for rape supported by proof beyond reasonable doubt?
- Was the defense of alibi adequately established to overturn the conviction?
- Did the evidence support a finding that the sexual act was non-consensual rather than consensual?
- Could the trial court properly order Rafanan to acknowledge and support the child despite the absence of direct proof of the child’s identity and circumstances of birth?
- Was the penalty and award of moral dama...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)