Case Digest (G.R. No. 230904)
Facts:
This is People of the Philippines v. XXX, G.R. No. 230904, January 08, 2020, Supreme Court First Division, Lazaro-Javier, J., writing for the Court. The plaintiff-appellee is the People of the Philippines; the accused-appellant is XXX (name withheld pursuant to People v. Cabalquinto).Under six informations dated August 8, 2006, XXX was charged with (1) rape by sexual assault (CR-06-8540), (2) acts of lasciviousness (CR-06-8541), (3) violation of Section 5(c) in relation to Section 6(b) of RA 9262 (CR-06-8542), (4) attempted rape (CR-06-8543), and (5–6) two counts of rape by carnal knowledge (CR-06-8544 and CR-06-8545). The cases were consolidated and tried jointly before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 39, Calapan City, Oriental Mindoro. On arraignment appellant pleaded not guilty and trial followed.
The prosecution presented the testimonies of AAA, BBB and CCC (minors and children of the complainant DDD) and corroborative stipulations of a medical exam by Dr. Angelita Legaspi who found healed hymenal lacerations at the 4, 8 and 12 o’clock positions on AAA. AAA testified to two incidents of forcible carnal intercourse in August 2002 (when she was 14) and multiple sexual assaults and molestations in August 2006 (at 17), describing threats by appellant and physical restraint; BBB and CCC corroborated occurrences in August 2006, including an episode where appellant allegedly chased the children with a bladed weapon and burned household items. Appellant testified alone, denying the charged acts, asserting alibi (working in Puerto Galera in 2002) and suggesting motives for fabrication (domestic quarrels over money).
The RTC, in a Joint Decision dated June 24, 2014, convicted appellant on all counts but downgraded attempted rape to acts of lasciviousness in one count; it imposed successive penalties including reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole on the qualified rape counts and various damages. The Court of Appeals, in CA‑G.R. CR‑HC No. 07090, affirmed the convictions by Decision dated December 12, 2016 but modified penalties and awards (including findings tha...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the verdicts of conviction?
- Were the elements of two counts of rape by carnal knowledge (August 14 and August 21, 2002) proven beyond reasonable doubt?
- Should the acts of August 3 and 4, 2006 be classified as rape by sexual assault or as lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of RA 7610?
- Were the acts against BBB on August 5, 2006 proven as lascivious conduct?
- Was appellant properly convicted for attempting to cause physical harm under Section 5(c) of RA 9262...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)