Case Digest (G.R. No. 225339)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. XXX, G.R. No. 225339, July 10, 2019, the Supreme Court Second Division, Lazaro‑Javier, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff‑appellee is the People of the Philippines; the accused‑appellant is XXX (hereafter "appellant").Appellant was charged with rape under Article 266‑A of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 8353, in relation to RA 7610, for an incident alleged to have occurred at about 3:00 a.m. on January 13, 2004 in Camarines Sur. The Information alleged that appellant — the uncle of the private complainant, AAA, then sixteen years old — by force and intimidation had carnal knowledge of AAA. The case was docketed before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 35, Iriga City, where appellant pleaded not guilty.
At trial, the prosecution presented AAA, her mother BBB, Dr. Marie Anne Ng‑Hua (medical examiner), PO2 Andrew Alcomendas (police), and social worker Guadalupe Bisenio. The defense presented appellant and his sister CCC. AAA testified that she awoke to a man on top of her, already undressed, who had his penis inside her vagina and was performing push‑and‑pull movements; she pushed him off after about two minutes and he threatened to kill her parents if she reported the incident. BBB testified to seeing appellant in AAA’s sleeping area that morning; Dr. Ng‑Hua’s medical certificate showed hymenal lacerations at 3, 6 and 9 o’clock positions. Appellant denied the charge, claiming he only tapped AAA’s leg to move her and later alleged the accusation stemmed from a family dispute.
The trial court rendered judgment on January 21, 2013, finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering payment of P75,000 civil indemnity, P75,000 moral damages, and P30,000 exemplary damages. Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA‑G.R. CR HC No. 06066). The Court of Appeals, in a Decision dated June 4, 2015, denied the appeal but modified the judgment to declar...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming appellant’s conviction for rape? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)