Case Digest (G.R. No. 230723)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Jupiter Villanueva y Bautista @ "Peter", G.R. No. 230723, February 13, 2019, the Supreme Court First Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellee is the People of the Philippines; the accused-appellant is Jupiter Villanueva y Bautista @ "Peter".On July 27–28, 2006, a 15‑year‑old girl (hereafter AAA) was alleged to have been accosted by four men, forcibly blindfolded, put into a tricycle, brought to a place where she was assaulted, rendered unconscious by blows and forced to ingest a bitter liquid, and released the following morning near her home with physical injuries and blood in her underwear. AAA reported the incident, underwent a medico‑legal examination at Camp Crame on July 28, 2006, and later identified one of her abductors and the tricycle driver in a police line‑up and photographic array; she identified accused‑appellant as one of the men following her prior to the abduction.
On August 2, 2006, accused‑appellant was charged by Information with forcible abduction with rape, alleging he and other unknown persons, while armed with a bladed weapon, abducted AAA by means of a tricycle and had sexual intercourse with her by force and intimidation. At arraignment he pleaded not guilty; pretrial stipulations covered identity and jurisdiction. The prosecution presented AAA, her aunt BBB, PC/Insp. Marianne Ebdane (medico‑legal officer), and SPO1 Ma. Theresa A. Bautista (Women’s Child Protection Desk). The defense presented accused‑appellant as its sole witness, who denied the accusations and advanced an alibi that he worked in a rice store and visited Parang, Marikina, the day of the incident.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 72, Antipolo City, convicted accused‑appellant on October 9, 2014 of Forcible Abduction with Rape in relation to Sec. 5(b) of RA 7610 and Sec. 5(a) of RA 8369, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and awarded P50,000.00 each as civil indemnity and moral damages. The RTC credited AAA’s testimony and identification, the corroboration by BBB and SPO1 Bautista, and the medico‑legal findings of PC/Insp. Ebdane; it found the alibi uncorroborated and conspiracy established.
Accused‑appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). In its August 31, 2016 Decision in CA‑G.R. CR‑HC No. 07482 the CA affirmed the conviction but modified the damage awards, increasing civil indemnity and moral damages to P75,000.00 each and ordering 6% interest from finality. The CA agreed AAA’s testimony and identification were credible an...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the conviction of accused‑appellant properly supported by credible identification and other evidence?
- Should the conviction be for forcible abduction with rape as charged, or should forcible abduction be absorbed into the crime of rape?
- Were the penalties and damages properly imposed and, if modified, what awards a...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)