Title
People vs. Canete
Case
G.R. No. 182193
Decision Date
Nov 7, 2008
A man convicted of six counts of simple rape against his niece, upheld by courts due to credible testimony, moral ascendancy, and consistent threats.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 182193)

Applicable Law

The appeal is governed by the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and relevant laws pertaining to sexual offenses, specifically those outlined in the Revised Penal Code, as amended.

Summary of Facts

The case consists of six counts of simple rape committed by the accused against the victim AAA, who was only nine years old at the time of the first incident in 1994. The accused, being the uncle of the minor, exploited his position of trust and authority. The incidents were characterized by elements of force, intimidation, and repeated abuse over several years, which AAA recounted in her testimony during the trial. After enduring numerous assaults, AAA eventually sought help and reported the crimes, leading to the charges against Canete.

Trial Court Proceedings

During the trial, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) received testimonies and evidence primarily from AAA. The accused presented a single witness to support his defense, which largely revolved around denying the charges and attempting to provide an alibi regarding his whereabouts during the incidents. On May 26, 2005, the RTC rendered a decision affirming the credibility of AAA's account and found Fidel Canete guilty beyond reasonable doubt of six counts of simple rape.

Appeal and Court of Appeals Decision

Upon appealing the RTC's ruling, the Court of Appeals (CA) evaluated the case based on Canete's arguments questioning the credibility of AAA's testimony and alleging procedural errors by the lower court. However, on November 20, 2007, the CA affirmed the RTC's decision, with a modification concerning the damages awarded. The CA underscored the strength of AAA's testimony, her identification of Canete as the perpetrator, and the nature of intimidation that facilitated the abuse.

Supreme Court Finding

The Supreme Court dismissed Canete's appeal, finding no grave error in the lower courts' decisions. The Court reiterated that the improbability of the incidents occurring, as argued by the defense, does not negate AAA's testimony. It emphasized that rape could occur in the presence of others and that threats of harm were sufficient to instill fear in the victim, preventing her from protesting. The decision reinforced the principle that a victim's silence during an assault does not undermine the occurrence of rape.

Rulings on Damages

In terms of civil liability, the Supreme Court also weighed the proper damages to be awarded. It upheld the civil indemnity and moral damages while clarifying the criteria for exemplary damages, acknowledging that in this case such an award was not applicable due to the absence of aggra

...continue reading

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