G.R. No. 11524 - Government of the Philippine Islands vs. El Monte de Piedad

Case Summary (G.R. No. 11524)

Petitioner and Respondent

Plaintiff-Appellee: People of the Philippines. Accused-Appellant: Danilo Catubig y Horio.

Key Dates

Alleged commission of the offense: on or about November 27, 1997. Medico-legal examination: December 1, 1997. Sworn statement taken: December 3, 1997. Information dated: January 29, 1998. Arraignment: July 16, 1998. RTC decision convicting the accused: December 11, 1998. Supreme Court decision: August 23, 2001 (governing constitutional provisions applied: 1987 Philippine Constitution).

Applicable Law

Criminal statute: Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 (the Death Penalty Law), and Article 15 (relationship as an alternative circumstance) of the Revised Penal Code. Constitutional provision invoked: Section 1(2), Article III of the 1987 Constitution (right of accused to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation). Civil and remedial provisions: Civil Code Articles 2229–2235 concerning exemplary (corrective/punitive) damages. Procedural rules: Sections 8 and 9 of Rule 110, Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure (effective December 1, 2000), regarding requirement to specify qualifying and aggravating circumstances in the complaint or information.

Facts

The prosecution’s evidence established that on November 27, 1997, Dannilyn (born August 9, 1985) and four younger siblings were watching television at home. The accused returned, sent the siblings to their aunt’s nearby house, instructed Dannilyn to go into the only room and lie down, removed her shorts and panty, removed his own clothing, lay on top of her, and inserted his penis into her vagina. Dannilyn testified the act was painful, that she did not resist because she feared her father who had beaten and raped her previously, and that the assault lasted until the aunt arrived. The assault was reported to police; a medico-legal examination on December 1, 1997, disclosed a healed laceration of the hymen caused by sexual intercourse.

Procedural History

An information for rape under Article 335, RPC (as amended) was filed January 29, 1998. The accused pleaded not guilty at arraignment on July 16, 1998. After trial, the Regional Trial Court (December 11, 1998) found the accused guilty of rape and sentenced him to death and ordered moral damages of P50,000.00. The imposition of the death penalty triggered automatic review by the Supreme Court. Appellant contended on appeal that (1) the RTC erred in convicting him of rape and (2) the information was defective for failing to allege that the victim was under 18 and that he was her father, both qualifying circumstances necessary to warrant the death penalty.

Issue Presented

Whether the conviction and the imposition of the death penalty were proper given the evidence and the allegations in the information; and whether the awards of civil damages, including exemplary damages, were appropriate under the circumstances and applicable law.

Supreme Court Ruling (Disposition)

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for rape but modified the judgment: the accused was found guilty only of simple rape (not qualified rape), sentenced to reclusion perpetua (rather than death), and ordered to pay the offended party P50,000.00 civil indemnity, P50,000.00 moral damages, and P25,000.00 exemplary damages. Costs were imposed de oficio.

Credibility and Sufficiency of Evidence

The Court gave full weight to the victim’s testimony, finding it plain, categorical, spontaneous, and consistent. The Court emphasized the probative force of a young victim’s straightforward account, especially where the victim reported the matter to authorities and underwent medico-legal examination. The Court accepted that the father’s parental authority and moral ascendancy can substitute for overt physical violence or explicit intimidation, thereby establishing the requisite element of violence, force, or intimidation in rape prosecutions involving a parent and his child. The defenses of alibi and denial were found insufficient in light of the positive testimony and the nature of alibi as an inherently weak and easily fabricated defense.

Constitutional and Pleading Requirement for Qualifying Circumstances

Under the 1987 Constitution, an accused is guaranteed the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. The Court reiterated that every element of the offense, including special qualifying circumstances that affect penalty, must be properly alleged in the information. Article 335 as amended by RA 7659 prescribes death as the penalty when rape is committed and the victim is under 18 years of age and the offender is a parent (among other specified relatives). The concurrence of minority and parental relationship are special qualifying circumstances that must be specifically alleged to support imposition of the death penalty. Because the information in this case did not allege the victim’s minority nor the filial relationship, the trial court erred by imposing the death penalty. Consequently, the Court reduced the conviction to simple rape punishable by reclusion perpetua.

Civil Liability: Moral, Civil Indemnity, and Exemplary Damages

The Court affirmed the award of moral damages (P50,000.00) and additionally ordered P50,000.00 as civil indemnity (compensatory damages) and P25,000.00 exemplary damages. The Court explained that rape inherently causes shame, mental anguish, and social humiliation, justifying moral and compensatory awards. On exemplary damages, the Court analyzed the concept and purpose of exemplary (punitive) damages under Civil Code Articles 2229–2235: they are awarded by way of example or correction when aggravating circumstances attend the commission of a crime and aim to deter and vindicate. The Court addressed the longstanding inconsistency in its prior jurisprudence regarding whether a relationship qualifying circumstance (as set forth in RA 7659) should also support exemplary damages. It concluded that the ordinary/qualifying distinction pertains primarily to criminal liability (penalty enhancement) and should not deprive the offended party of civil relief. Therefore, an aggravating circumstance—whether ordinary or qualifying—may ground exemplary damages under Article 2230. Given the facts and the presence of aggravating elemen

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 11524)

Case Caption, Docket and Decision Date

Full caption as provided: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. DANILO CATUBIG Y HORIO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
Supreme Court citation: 416 Phil. 102 EN BANC; G.R. No. 137842.
Decision authored by Justice Vitug, delivered August 23, 2001.
Records reflect automatic review due to imposition of the death penalty by the trial court.

Criminal Information and Charge

Information dated 29 January 1998 filed before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 78, Malolos, Bulacan.
Accused charged: Danilo Catubig y Horio.
Offense charged: Rape, penalized under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (as amended by Republic Act No. 7659).
Alleged substantive facts in the information:
- Date and place: On or about 27 November 1997, in the municipality of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan.
- Conduct: Accused "wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, threats and intimidation and with lewd design have carnal knowledge of the said offended party against her will."
The information did not allege (i) the minority of the victim or (ii) the familial relationship between victim and offender as qualifying circumstances.

Arraignment, Plea and Trial Initiation

Arraignment date: 16 July 1998.
Accused, represented by court-appointed counsel (de oficio), pleaded "not guilty."
Trial commenced thereafter.

Factual Background as Presented by the Prosecution

Date/time of incident: November 27, 1997, around 4:00 in the afternoon.
Victim: Dannilyn Catubig y Lazaro; date of birth given as August 9, 1985 (implying age at incident).
Setting: The victim and four younger siblings were watching television in the sala of their house in Sunlife Subdivision, San Jose del Monte, Bulacan.
Sequence of events as alleged:
- Father (accused) arrived, sent siblings to their aunt’s house nearby.
- Accused instructed Dannilyn to enter a room and lie on the bed.
- Accused removed Dannilyn's shorts and panty; he removed his brief and t-shirt and lay on top of her.
- Dannilyn, who feared accused because he had beaten and raped her in the past, did not resist; accused succeeded in inserting his penis into her vagina.
- Dannilyn’s aunt, suspicious, informed the victim’s mother; upon confrontation, Dannilyn revealed the rape.
- Incident was reported to San Jose del Monte Police Station; sworn statement taken December 3, 1997.
- Medical examination: Dr. Wilfredo E. Tiera, Medico-Legal Officer, NBI, examined Dannilyn on December 1, 1997 and found "healed laceration in the hymen" caused by sexual intercourse.

Victim’s Testimony at Trial (Key Points)

Dannilyn testified in a plain, categorical, spontaneous and frank manner and remained consistent.
She described:
- Being told to go into the only room in the house and to lie down.
- The accused removing her shorts and panty and his removal of brief and shirt.
- The accused lying on top of her and inserting his penis into her vagina, causing pain.
- Push-and-pull movements lasting about one hour until the aunt arrived.
- Prior incidents: she testified that this was not the first time, alleging the first occurrence when she was in grade 1 and several incidents thereafter.
- She stated she did not resist because she feared her father who had been beating them since childhood to threaten them.

Accused’s Defense and Contentions

Accused denied the rape charge.
He claimed the charge was motivated by ill-will arising from a quarrel with his wife and daughter.
He admitted fighting with his wife on 27 November 1997, striking his wife and daughter, and contended that the rape complaint followed as retaliatory conduct by wife and daughter.
Appellant raised assignments of error on appeal:
1. That the trial court erred in finding him guilty of rape under Article 335 as amended by RA 7659.
2. That the information was defective for failing to state that the accused is the father of the victim and that the victim was under 18 at the time (special qualifying circumstances for the death penalty).

Trial Court Ruling and Sentencing

Date of trial court decision: 11 December 1998.
Trial court verdict: Accused DANILO CATUBIG Y HORIO found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE defined and penalized under Article 335 as amended by RA No. 7659.
Sentence imposed by trial court:
- Death penalty.
- Ordered to pay private complainant Dannilyn Catubig moral damages in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).

Issues on Appeal / Before the Supreme Court

Whether the conviction and penalty imposed (death) were proper given the information’s allegations and the evidence.
Whether the information’s failure to allege (a) the victim's minority and (b) the familial relationship between accused and victim precluded imposition of the death penalty under RA No. 7659.
Credibility of the victim versus defenses of alibi and denial.
Proper civil liability and damages to be awarded, including moral, civil indemnity, and exemplary damages; the role of aggravating/qualifying circumstances for civil damages.
Whether relationship as an aggravating/qualifying circumstance should still permit exemplary damages when it functions as an element qualifying the offense under RA No. 7659.
Applicability and retroactivity of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure (effective 01 December 2000) requiring aggravating/qualifying circumstances to be stated in the information.

Supreme Court’s Assessment of the Evidence and Credibility

The Court found Dannilyn’s testimony credible:
- Characterized as plain, categorical, spontaneous, frank and consistent.
- The Court observed the natural reluctance and humiliation of an abused child who nonetheless pursued police investigation and public trial, lending credence to her account.
The Court accepted that paternal authority and parental influence served as the substi