Case Digest (G.R. No. 238405)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. XXX, G.R. No. 238405, December 07, 2020, Supreme Court Third Division, Hernando, J., writing for the Court. The prosecution (the People) charged accused-appellant XXX in three Informations: Criminal Case No. 9994‑G (object rape / rape by sexual assault), Criminal Case No. 9995‑G (statutory rape), and Criminal Case No. 10479‑G (statutory rape). The victim, referred to as AAA, was the eight‑year‑old daughter of BBB, the latter being the common‑law partner of XXX. XXX pleaded not guilty and the three cases were tried jointly by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 61, Gumaca, Quezon.At trial the prosecution presented AAA’s testimony describing forcible fellatio and penile penetration on or about September 5, 2007; BBB’s testimony recounting observing XXX forcing AAA to “breastfeed” from his genitals; and the medical examination of Dr. Genevive Bayongan Laguerta, who found hymenal lacerations and opined that an object or penis had been forcibly inserted. AAA’s birth certificate showed she was born February 6, 1999. XXX denied the charges but admitted being at home with AAA on the date in question and acknowledged he and BBB were not legally married but living as common‑law partners.
On December 4, 2015, the RTC convicted XXX of Rape by Sexual Assault (Crim. Case No. 9994‑G) and Statutory Rape (Crim. Case Nos. 9995‑G and 10479‑G), imposing various terms of imprisonment and damages. On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) in an April 25, 2017 Decision affirmed convictions for Rape by Sexual Assault in No. 9994‑G and for Statutory Rape (qualified rape) in No. 10479‑G, but acquitted XXX in No. 9995‑G for reasonable doubt; the CA modifie...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is accused‑appellant XXX guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)