G.R. No. 254254 - People vs. XXX

On December 11, 2015, three separate Informations were filed against accused-appellant XXX for the crime of Rape under Articles 266-A and 266-B of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended by R.A. No. 8353.
The victim, AAA, is the biological daughter of XXX. AAA was 13 years old in 2009 and the alleged incidents occurred when she was between 13 and 15 years old.
The three cases alleged:

Criminal Case No. 158506 - Qualified rape by carnal knowledge in 2009 when AAA was 13 years old.
Criminal Case No. 158507 - Qualified rape by carnal knowledge in October 2011 when AAA was 15 years old.
Criminal Case No. 158508 - Qualified rape by sexual assault on March 6, 2012, including forced fellatio and anal rape when AAA was 15 years old.

AAA testified that XXX began raping her at age 13, occurring 3-4 times weekly. She did not report early due to fear of being killed.
She recounted a 2009 incident where XXX forcibly had vaginal intercourse with her while she was asleep, causing bleeding and pain. AAA informed her mother but was dismissed.
On March 6, 2012, when AAA refused sexual advances, XXX forcibly performed fellatio on her and inserted his penis into her anus.
Following further assault attempts and physical abuse on March 7, 2012, AAA left home, confided in her mother on March 9, 2012, was hospitalized, and subsequently filed complaints.

XXX denied the charges, alleging AAA fabricated the allegations out of spite after he disciplined her for inappropriate conduct in 2009.

On May 16, 2018, XXX was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape by carnal knowledge (Criminal Case No. 158506) and qualified rape by sexual assault (Criminal Case No. 158508).
The court acquitted XXX of Criminal Case No. 158507 due to insufficient evidence.
Findings emphasized the credibility of AAA’s testimony and recognized qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship (father-daughter).
Sentences:

Reclusion perpetua without parole for qualified rape (Case No. 158506) with damages awarded.
Prision mayor to reclusion temporal for qualified rape by sexual assault (Case No. 158508) with damages awarded.

The CA affirmed the RTC’s decision on October 2, 2019, upholding AAA’s credibility and the guilt of XXX.
CA acknowledged the Information in Case No. 158508 was duplicitous but ruled that XXX waived objection by failing to raise it timely.
CA increased the damages awarded in Case No. 158508 from ₱30,000 each to ₱100,000 each.

XXX challenged his convictions, focusing primarily on the duplicitous nature of the Information in Criminal Case No. 158508 and the insufficiency of evidence.

Whether accused-appellant XXX is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape by carnal knowledge in Criminal Case No. 158506.

Whether accused-appellant XXX is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape by sexual assault in Criminal Case No. 158508 despite the duplicitous Information.

The effect of the duplicitous Information and whether the accused waived his right to question it by not objecting before trial.

Whether AAA’s failure to immediately report the incidents and the absence of external injuries or medical corroboration affect her credibility.

The proper classification and penalty for the acts involving a minor aged 12 to below 18 under R.A. No. 7610 in relation to rape by sexual assault.