G.R. No. 266754 - People vs. Marivic Saldivar y Regatcho

Marivic Saldivar y Regatcho was charged with violation of Section 4(a), qualified by Section 6(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, as amended by Republic Act No. 10364, for human trafficking.
The Information alleged that between March 2016 and May 2017, Saldivar took custody of a 14-year-old minor street child, referred to as AAA266754, for the purpose of prostitution and sexual exploitation by acting as procurer.

Upon arraignment, Saldivar pleaded not guilty.
The minor, AAA266754, testified that she ran away from home and was introduced to Saldivar, with whom she lived.
Saldivar reportedly pimped AAA266754 to men who also bought drugs from her, receiving money before the minor's sexual abuse.
The abuse lasted for about a year until the minor was rescued by the Emergency Welfare Section.
Social Welfare Officer I Genesis M. Panganiban interviewed Saldivar, who claimed the minor chose to subject herself to prostitution and handed the money earned to her.
Saldivar admitted to sometimes directing men to the minor but insisted it was the minor's decision to accept or decline offers.

Dr. Voltaire P. Nulud issued a Medico-Legal Report showing deep healed lacerations and blunt penetrating trauma to the minor's hymen.
Saldivar denied the charges, asserting that the minor engaged voluntarily in prostitution and that she was angry at Saldivar for asking her to leave.
Saldivar alleged a motive for fabrication by social welfare officers who had previously filed complaints against her.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Saldivar guilty beyond reasonable doubt, noting the minor's credible testimony.
Saldivar was convicted of qualified trafficking in persons due to the minor's age.
The RTC sentenced Saldivar to life imprisonment, imposed a PHP 2,000,000 fine, and ordered payment of PHP 50,000 moral damages to the victim.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but increased moral damages to PHP 500,000 with interest.
The CA held that the minor's testimony was credible and that the absence of an entrapment operation did not negate the evidence.

Saldivar contested the conviction citing inconsistencies in the minor’s testimony and the absence of an entrapment operation.
The Supreme Court took the case for final resolution.

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly affirmed the conviction of Marivic Saldivar y Regatcho for qualified trafficking in persons under Republic Act No. 9208, as amended.