Case Digest (G.R. No. 205230)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Ernesto Ventura, Sr., G.R. No. 205230, March 12, 2014, the Supreme Court First Division, Reyes, J., writing for the Court.On March 24, 2005, BBB (the victim’s aunt) observed Ernesto Ventura, Sr. partially undressed and on top of a woman on a bench in front of his son’s bakery; BBB recognized the woman as her niece, AAA, then 17 years old, unschooled and mentally deficient. BBB intervened; AAA later confessed she was impregnated by Ventura and admitted prior sexual abuse by him. BBB and others proceeded to the CIDG and filed a complaint that culminated in the filing of an Information on March 31, 2005 (Criminal Case No. 05-0366, RTC of Parañaque City, Branch 194). Barangay tanod Ronaldo Antiporda and CIDG personnel visited Ventura’s home; Ventura and his wife voluntarily accompanied them to the barangay hall.
The prosecution presented AAA’s testimony, BBB’s testimony, the testimony of barangay tanod Antiporda, and the medico-legal officer’s reports. The medico-legal officer testified that AAA was mentally deficient, found her pregnant, and recorded “definite evidence of abuse or sexual contact.” AAA testified that Ventura forced her to lie on a bench, undressed her, had sexual intercourse with her, threatened her with a knife, and afterwards compelled her to go sell pandesal while holding her. AAA also said Ventura gave her clothes and money and warned her not to tell anyone.
Ventura denied the charge and pleaded alibi, claiming he stayed in the bakery making bread and only left at about 10:00 a.m. on the date in question; he also admitted knowing AAA’s mental defect. After trial, on May 27, 2009 the RTC convicted Ventura of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered P100,000 in damages. On appeal, the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 04133 affirmed with modificat...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the erroneous reference in the Information to Article 266-A(1)(d) (demented) instead of the correct subparagraph Article 266-A(1)(b) (deprived of reason) invalidate the prosecution or otherwise bar conviction?
- Has the prosecution proven beyond reasonable doubt that Ventura committed rape against AAA, a m...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)