Title
People vs. Andal
Case
G.R. No. L-39763
Decision Date
Mar 8, 1976
A 13-year-old girl was raped by Mario Andal, aided by his father Isidro, who held her down. Medical evidence and credible testimony led to their conviction, with Mario as principal and Isidro as accomplice. Both sentenced to life imprisonment.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-39763)

Applicable Law

The case is adjudicated under the 1935 Constitution as the decision predates the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

Factual Background

The prosecution established that both Mario and Isidro Andal were involved in the crime of rape against complainant Lucila Buenafe. The incident occurred after the appellants attempted to acquire a pig and sprayer from the Buenafe family but were denied. In retaliation, they forcibly took the complainant to a nearby hill, where the son, Mario, committed the sexual act while Isidro restrained the victim by holding her hands.

Medical Evidence

Medical examination conducted after the incident revealed significant physical injuries indicative of sexual assault. Dr. Gaspar E. Villafane reported contusions, lacerations of the hymen, and that the complainant displayed signs consistent with having been raped, corroborated by the timing of her injuries. The victim was hospitalized for a week due to the severity of her injuries.

Legal Proceedings

The trial court found both appellants guilty based on the victim's testimony and medical evidence. The appellants' defense leaned heavily on the presumption of innocence and questioned the reliability of the complainant's account. The court, however, found that the evidence was more than sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Assessment of Testimonial Evidence

The court considered the testimony of Lucila Buenafe to be credible. Despite attempts by the defense to depict inconsistencies, the cumulative evidence, including her emotional state during testimonies and corroborative marks of trauma, supported her account of the events. The presence of medical findings further reinforced the complainant's narrative against the appellants.

Constitutional Presumption of Innocence

The appellants contended that the prosecution failed to satisfactorily prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, invoking the constitutional presumption of innocence. However, the court observed that the medical findings and the victim's consistent recounting of the events significantly outweighed the defense's assertions.

Criminal Liability

Mario Andal was found to have directly perpetrated the rape act while Isidro Andal acted as an accomplice by facili

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.