Case Digest (G.R. No. 177145)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 177145)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Joey Toriaga, G.R. No. 177145, February 09, 2011, Supreme Court Third Division, Bersamin, J., writing for the Court.
The prosecution charged Joey Toriaga with rape for an incident that occurred on November 26, 1995 in Caloocan City involving a 13‑year‑old girl identified as AAA (name withheld pursuant to R.A. No. 7610 and R.A. No. 9262). AAA was alone at her aunt CCC's house when Toriaga — a close acquaintance of AAA's family and a person who slept and worked in CCC's household — came to the house drunk, entered, and by force and intimidation (using an icepick) allegedly compelled AAA to submit to sexual intercourse and later stabbed her while she attempted to resist.
AAA was taken to a hospital by neighbors and the medico‑legal report showed multiple contused and sutured wounds on the nape, posterior chest and back, abdomen and buttock areas, a superficial laceration at the fourchette still bleeding, vestibular congestion and contusion, an intact but short thick hymen with the hymenal orifice admitting a 2.0 cm tube with moderate resistance, and tight vaginal walls and prominent rugosities — findings the trial court considered indicative of sexual assault.
An information for rape was filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 128, Caloocan City, on November 28, 1995, and a separate information for frustrated homicide was also lodged. The RTC initially consolidated the cases; Toriaga pleaded not guilty on January 17, 1996. After his intervening conviction for frustrated homicide in another case, only the rape charge remained. During trial he at one point moved to plead guilty but later withdrew the plea on November 20, 2000 after being apprised of the penalty. He maintained a defense of denial and alibi at trial and later claimed BBB had instigated AAA to testify against him.
On February 26, 2002, the RTC convicted Toriaga of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordered payment of P50,000 as civil indemnity and P75,000 as moral damages, and noted the accused was already serving sentence at New Bilibid Prison. Toriaga appealed to the Supreme Court, which on September 6, 2004 transferred the records to the Court of Appeals (CA) for intermediate review pursuant to the procedure in People v. Mateo. In the CA (C.A.-G.R. CR‑HC No. 01617), Toriaga for the first time shifted his defense to one of consensual sexual intercourse (and alternatively argued qualified seduction), claiming AAA undressed voluntarily and failed to shout or flee. The CA rejected these defenses, finding no custody/authority or household relationship to sustain qualified seduction and holding that the elements of seduction were not alleged in the information; it affirmed the RTC conviction by decision promulgated November 17, 2006.
Toriaga then sought review before the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 177145). The Supreme Court, Third Division, issued the present resolution affirming the CA decision in all respects but modifying the award of damages by adding exemplary damages of P30,000.
Issues:
- Should the belatedly pleaded defense of consensual sexual intercourse, raised for the first time on appeal, be considered?
- Was Joey Toriaga guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape under the circumstances alleged?
- Could the accused instead be convicted for qualified seduction as argued on appeal?
- Were the penalty and damages imposed by the trial court (and affirmed by the CA) proper, and is an award of exemplary damages warranted?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)