Title
People vs. Udang, Sr. y Sevilla
Case
G.R. No. 210161
Decision Date
Jan 10, 2018
Bienvinido Udang convicted of two counts of sexual abuse under RA 7610 for raping a minor in 2002 and 2003; Supreme Court modified charges, upheld conviction, and imposed reduced penalties.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 210161)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Parties and Charges
    • Plaintiff-Appellee: People of the Philippines
    • Accused-Appellant: Bienvinido Udang, Sr. y Sevilla
  • Alleged Incidents and Medical Findings
    • First Incident (September 2002)
      • Victim (“AAA”), then 12 years old, drank five bottles of Tanduay rum at Udang’s house with Udang’s children (Betty and Bienvinido Jr.), became intoxicated, was carried by Udang into a dark room, undressed, kissed, and raped.
      • Udang reportedly left to perform barangay tanod duty, leaving AAA too weak to move.
    • Second Incident (December 2003)
      • AAA, then 13, drank three bottles of Tanduay rum at the same house with Udang and his son, fell asleep in a room, was followed, undressed, and again raped by Udang.
    • Medical Examination (April 2004)
      • Dr. Darlene T. Revelo found healed hymenal lacerations at 4, 7, and 10 o’clock positions and excoriations on AAA’s genitalia.
  • Trial Proceedings and Defense
    • Informations (December 2005)
      • Two counts of child abuse under RA 7610, sec. 5(b), docketed as Family Case Nos. 2006-140 and 2006-141.
    • Prosecution Evidence
      • AAA’s detailed, consistent testimony of both rapes and threats by Betty to enforce compliance.
      • Medical corroboration by Dr. Revelo.
    • Defense Evidence
      • Udang’s denial and alibi that he was with family and tanods at the times alleged.
      • Betty’s denial of any drinking sessions with AAA.
      • Fellow inmates (Gandawali, Orcales) testified that AAA later recanted, attributing accusations to other relatives.
    • Decisions Below
      • RTC (March 12, 2012): Convicted Udang of two counts of rape under RPC Art. 266-A(1), imposing reclusion perpetua per count and awarding P50,000 civil indemnity, P50,000 moral damages, and P30,000 exemplary damages each.
      • CA (October 9, 2013): Affirmed RTC decision in toto.
      • SC Appeal: Questions on judge substitution, double jeopardy, correct criminal characterization, and sufficiency of evidence.

Issues:

  • Can a judge who did not personally hear the witnesses but relies on the complete transcript decide on their credibility?
  • Does prosecuting the same acts under both RPC Art. 266-A(1) (rape) and RA 7610 sec. 5(b) (sexual abuse) violate double jeopardy?
  • Did the Informations charge Udang with rape or sexual abuse, and what crime may he validly be convicted of?
  • Do the facts and evidence support a conviction for two counts of sexual abuse under RA 7610 sec. 5(b)?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.