Case Digest (G.R. No. 137341)
Facts:
The case at hand originates from an incident that occurred on May 15, 1998, in Barangay Bani, Bayambang, Pangasinan, Philippines. The accused, which include Samuel B. Buada, Benigno V. Villanueva, and Dennis F. Verceles, were charged with the crime of rape as per Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 7659. The information was filed on June 17, 1998, alleging that the accused, by means of force or intimidation, conspired to rape Marianne Pinky Limson, who was only 12 years old at the time.On that day, the victim traveled to visit a former classmate but was unable to find the residence. While waiting for a ride home, she was approached by Verceles, who falsely indicated that Villanueva wanted to talk to her. This led her to accompany him, but she soon realized that Villanueva was a stranger. As she attempted to leave, she was forcibly detained by Verceles and three other men. The accused forcibly brought her to a nearby deserted Bani Elementary School, where
Case Digest (G.R. No. 137341)
Facts:
- Incident Background
- On or about May 15, 1998, an incident occurred in Barangay Bani, Bayambang, Pangasinan, where four individuals—Samuel B. Buada, Dennis F. Verceles, Benigno V. Villanueva, and an unidentified man—were involved in the commission of rape against Marianne Pinky Limson, a 12-year-old Grade VI student.
- The victim, while on her way home after visiting a former classmate, encountered the accused, which eventually led to her being forcibly taken to the Bani Elementary School.
- Course of the Crime
- The events unfolded as follows:
- In the afternoon, while still in daylight, the victim was approached by Verceles, who mentioned that Villanueva wished to talk to her; she initially went along, thinking she recognized Villanueva.
- Upon realizing that Villanueva was a stranger, she attempted to leave but was accosted by another male stranger.
- The four men, including Buada, Verceles, Villanueva, and the unidentified accomplice, forcibly took her into the deserted school building.
- The perpetrators compelled her to drink gin, which caused the victim to become tipsy and nauseated.
- The assailants took turns raping her in one of the rooms, and later, around 3:30 A.M., Villanueva and Buada returned to further assault her when she woke up.
- The victim was then instructed by Villanueva to return the following day, and she subsequently walked home in a weakened state.
- Medical and Forensic Findings
- A medical examination of the victim revealed:
- Lacerations on the fourchette with active bleeding and an incomplete laceration on the hymen with bleeding noted at the 6 o’clock position.
- Bluish discoloration of the hymen and erythematous labia minora.
- A sperm smear test conducted on the victim confirmed the presence of spermatozoa, establishing that sexual intercourse had occurred.
- Testimonies of the Parties
- Victim’s Testimony:
- The victim testified that she clearly identified the participants as Dennis Verceles, Benigno Villanueva, and Samuel Buada, noting specific features such as a tattoo on Villanueva’s chest.
- During both direct and re-direct examinations, she consistently attested to the non-consensual nature of the assaults, using terms such as “raped” and explaining that she was forced to drink and remained in a situation of captivity.
- Defendant’s Testimony:
- Villanueva denied having carnal knowledge of the complainant, claiming that he was outside the room when the others had sexual intercourse with her.
- Buada and Verceles, after initially pleading not guilty, eventually pleaded guilty.
- Verceles provided testimony that partially corroborated Villanueva’s account, although his testimony included assertions about the voluntary participation of the victim in drinking and being present at the scene.
- Witness Testimonies:
- The victim’s mother and a prosecution witness, Florante Limson, testified regarding her condition and the report of the assault.
- The consistency of the victim’s account was reaffirmed through her positive identification in both a police lineup and in open court.
- Judicial Proceedings
- At trial in the Regional Trial Court of San Carlos City, Branch 57, all accused were found guilty:
- Samuel Buada and Dennis Verceles were sentenced as principals of the rape charge to prision mayor to reclusion temporal, with suspended sentences due to their status as youthful offenders, along with an order to pay civil indemnity of P50,000 each to the victim.
- Benigno Villanueva was convicted of rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua and was also ordered to indemnify the victim P50,000.
- On appeal, Villanueva contended that:
- The victim did not positively identify him as one who had sexual intercourse with her due to poor lighting and her inebriated state at the time of the assault.
- There was insufficient proof of force and intimidation on his part.
Issues:
- Identification of the Accused
- Whether the victim’s identification of Villanueva as one of her assailants was reliable and sufficient given the conditions under which it was made.
- Whether the darkness of the scene affected the victim’s ability to correctly identify her assailants.
- Establishment of Force and Intimidation
- Whether there was sufficient evidence to prove that the rape was committed through the use of force or intimidation.
- Whether the victim’s actions during the assault (such as resistance) correctly indicated non-consent.
- Credibility and Consistency of the Victim’s Testimony
- Whether the detailed, categorical, and consistent testimony of the 12-year-old victim, despite her tender age, sufficed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Whether any inconsistencies in the victim's account could undermine the prosecution’s case.
- Proper Application of Penalty
- Whether the trial court erred in imposing reclusion perpetua on Villanueva instead of a death penalty or a harsher sanction, as argued by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) based on alleged aggravating circumstances.
- Whether the aggravating circumstances demanded by the OSG were properly alleged in the information and thereby applicable in determining the penalty.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)